Jump to content

LocomotionatShildon

National Collection in Miniature Dean Goods Class No 2516

Recommended Posts

No one expects that, but OO modelling is a compromise and 100% accuracy should not be expected at these price levels.

 

 

If such high level of accuracy will be the only level accepted, then you may have to dig much deeper into your pockets.

 

Black label accuracy for around £100 is an unrealistic expectation.

 

As a reality check I met a friend at Warley who has just taken delivery of a 4mm Jubilee.Highly accurate with the only obvious compromise being gauge. The invoice was for a four figure sum and my friend supplied the components!

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

Not at all well said.  The inability to produce a perfect scale replica doesn't excuse Oxford failing to make a basically accurate one. 

 

In fairness to Edwardian (and few of you have been), I would guess he isn't looking for perfection and would accept a model of a Dean Goods as accurate as, say ....

post-30114-0-66256500-1480353255_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I was at Warley over the weekend , with the Dean Goods, and it drew lots of really nice comments from modellers at the show. Some won't buy it because it's the wrong era or not a modern image locomotive. Ok some won't buy it because in their opinion something isn't quite right and that's fine. I will say we took orders from customers because they liked it and understood it is a SAMPLE! Things can be changed and these will and are being looked at. There are, as you all know , limitations in producing a rtr model exactly as the real one and some amendments need to be made from time to time.

 

The national collection in miniature brand have made some absolutely fantastic models in the past and will continue to do so in the future, and we have hundreds of happy and contented customers. Not every model suits everyone and that is your choice, we understand that collectors collect and modellers run them. Each to their own.

 

The team at locomotionmodels is very small and we try very hard to get things right. The sample was handed to us at the weekend and the curator hasn't even seen it yet in the flesh to give us his thoughts on handrails and rivets.

 

When the finished models appear please be as critical as you like if we got something obviously wrong but don't diss it when it's not finished.

 

Sandra

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One very simple question - assuming you decide as a manufacturer to make a model of something be it a loco, coach, wagon or building there will inevitably be an element of compromise.  The question is to what extent you do or don't value the extent of that compromise in a model you might be likely to purchase and the second question is the extent to which you do or don't value that compromise against what you have to pay for a particular model - both of those compromises are personal choices,

 

But equally if a manufacturer offers a model of something, whatever it happens to be, they should - in my view - admit to the compromises they have made, really to do otherwise might be interpreted as misrepresentation of their product, irrespective of what they charge for it.  Misrepresentation does not - in my view - go with price, if it's 'cheap' (by normal current market standards) then claims that it is accurate to a particular prototype at a particular period in its life could still be regarded as misrepresentation if it isn't accurate and even more so if it is obviously not accurate, irrespective of the price.

 

The problem with the Oxford Dean Goods is that if it actually does represent a particular prototype at a particular period in its life that does not seem to be reflected in the running numbers it is being sold with.  Fair enough - you pays your money (in this case getting a bargain by current r-t-r standards) which you either accept or start to hack about, arguably it is cheap enough to hack about.  Or you look for a Mainline/Hornby body which hopefully might fit the Oxford chassis - it does present a number of modelling options for those who want them.

 

I can understand the NRM's reasons for going to Oxford - Oxford's prices are way cheaper than anybody else's and completely out of line with every other factory in China pitching to make locos for the British market, irrespective of who owns them.  And there is clear benefit in buying in something which has a marketable price in a marketplace where costs, and hence retail prices, are spiralling upwards.  But anyone buying in from Oxford has, on the basis of that concern's British outline railway models to date also got to consider their track record.  As it happens I'm sure that Oxford will manage to produce the goods but it has also to be accepted that in order to do so things don't just need careful scanning but need close attention and extensive checking of CADs and EPs etc during development towards production and that will potentially cost time and money.  doing a CAD once is one thing - amending it several times over is something else entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spet0114

I was at Warley over the weekend , with the Dean Goods, and it drew lots of really nice comments from modellers at the show. Some won't buy it because it's the wrong era or not a modern image locomotive. Ok some won't buy it because in their opinion something isn't quite right and that's fine. I will say we took orders from customers because they liked it and understood it is a SAMPLE! Things can be changed and these will and are being looked at. There are, as you all know , limitations in producing a rtr model exactly as the real one and some amendments need to be made from time to time.

The national collection in miniature brand have made some absolutely fantastic models in the past and will continue to do so in the future, and we have hundreds of happy and contented customers. Not every model suits everyone and that is your choice, we understand that collectors collect and modellers run them. Each to their own.

The team at locomotionmodels is very small and we try very hard to get things right. The sample was handed to us at the weekend and the curator hasn't even seen it yet in the flesh to give us his thoughts on handrails and rivets.

When the finished models appear please be as critical as you like if we got something obviously wrong but don't diss it when it's not finished.

Sandra

Sorry Sandra, your post is not internally consistent. If no-one were to provide criticism of the sample, there would be no errors to seek to correct and very little point in producing and exhibiting the sample in the first place!

 

As you correctly point out, the NCIM collection has included some excellent models and the Rapido model of No. 1 looks set to continue this. The Oxford model doesn't quite appear to be of a similar level of quality and this leads to understandable concern that the NCIM brand is being cheapened. Furthermore, the fact that the two most obvious faults have been carried over from the earlier samples that Oxford have shown (and that have been extensively commented on) appears to demonstrate either a lack of basic research on the part of Locomotion or an unwillingness to adjust tooling by Oxford. In either case, it does little to inspire confidence.

 

I posted earlier on that I was heartened to hear you're working with the newer entrants to the market such as Oxford. I stand by that comment, but if their models are going to undo the good work that Bachmann, Rapido etc have done in establishing NCIM as the market leader in accurate exclusives that it is, then it might prove to be a retrograde step.

Edited by spet0114
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a kettle person but it does look a nice piece and excellent value with the presentation box etc. If I didn't have as much as I currently have on order; I might have bought one just like I did with KGV - only becasue it looked good! Green locos in gloss seem to look well in my oppinion, hence I bought the class 20 off you yesterday even though it isn't technically accurate for the 'as preserved' image... it just looked good and hope it has added some more coffers to the Shildon Locomotion pot for restorations. Coming from a preservation background this is why i'd sooner buy an exclusive model from you, rather than some other retail outlet, becuase I know the profit is going to a good cause, and I think this is what a lot of people are forgetting!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness to Oxford they do make adjustments - the NBR wagon slated by ABS turned out allright in the end. How much say do locomotion get in what will be adjusted? 

 

So far for 2516 the list looks something like:

 

Smokebox door is the wrong type

Rivets on splashers incorrect*

Cab side profile incorrect and missing rivets*

wash out plug and/or handrail position incorrect*

firebox profile incorrect*

Whistles wrong way round*

Colour is incorrect

 

*items are applicable to all variants from Oxford. 

Edited by Quarryscapes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness to Oxford they do make adjustments - the NBR wagon slated by ABS turned out allright in the end. How much say do locomotion get in what will be adjusted? 

 

So far for 2516 the list looks something like:

 

Smokebox door is the wrong type

Rivets on splashers incorrect*

Cab side profile incorrect and missing rivets*

wash out plug and/or handrail position incorrect*

firebox profile incorrect*

Colour is incorrect

 

*items are applicable to all variants from Oxford. 

 

You forgot the whistles being the wrong way round for 2516.

 

Incidentally I don't really know about the colour as I didn't see the model at Warley so can't properly judge it although let us not forget that if it is copied from 2516 its colour is 50 year old Swindon factory paint which has undergone 50 years of regular cleaning attention with, until comparatively recently and some alleged elf & safety nonsense, traditional engine cleaning materials being used for the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot the whistles being the wrong way round for 2516.

 

Incidentally I don't really know about the colour as I didn't see the model at Warley so can't properly judge it although let us not forget that if it is copied from 2516 its colour is 50 year old Swindon factory paint which has undergone 50 years of regular cleaning attention with, until comparatively recently and some alleged elf & safety nonsense, traditional engine cleaning materials being used for the job.

 

Whistles added to list. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Sandra, your post is not internally consistent. If no-one were to provide criticism of the sample, there would be no errors to seek to correct and very little point in producing and exhibiting the sample in the first place!

 

As you correctly point out, the NCIM collection has included some excellent models and the Rapido model of No. 1 looks set to continue this. The Oxford model doesn't quite appear to be of a similar level of quality and this leads to understandable concern that the NCIM brand is being cheapened. Furthermore, the fact that the two most obvious faults have been carried over from the earlier samples that Oxford have shown (and that have been extensively commented on) appears to demonstrate either a lack of basic research on the part of Locomotion or an unwillingness to adjust tooling by Oxford. In either case, it does little to inspire confidence.

 

I posted earlier on that I was heartened to hear you're working with the newer entrants to the market such as Oxford. I stand by that comment, but if their models are going to undo the good work that Bachmann, Rapido etc have done in establishing NCIM as the market leader in accurate exclusives that it is, then it might prove to be a retrograde step.

The EP sample we received from Oxford has been through some of the checks by our curator Anthony and also our Chairman Brian Greenwood. Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!.  Both have a lifelong passion for steam locos, railways and models and they do know their stuff!  They have identified some issues which will be corrected, 

 

Anyway, there is a list, it has been discussed and where we can make amends, we will.  

 

By the way, the sound version works on analogue and although you don't get all the functions, what you do get is very good!

 

I think you will be pleased when it's finished.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EP sample we received from Oxford has been through some of the checks by our curator Anthony and also our Chairman Brian Greenwood. Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!.  Both have a lifelong passion for steam locos, railways and models and they do know their stuff!  They have identified some issues which will be corrected, 

 

Anyway, there is a list, it has been discussed and where we can make amends, we will.  

 

By the way, the sound version works on analogue and although you don't get all the functions, what you do get is very good!

 

I think you will be pleased when it's finished.

 

Good news.  Thanks for the update.

 

I for one will keep my mind open and my fingers crossed.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spet0114

The EP sample we received from Oxford has been through some of the checks by our curator Anthony and also our Chairman Brian Greenwood. Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!.  Both have a lifelong passion for steam locos, railways and models and they do know their stuff!  They have identified some issues which will be corrected, 

 

Anyway, there is a list, it has been discussed and where we can make amends, we will.  

 

By the way, the sound version works on analogue and although you don't get all the functions, what you do get is very good!

 

I think you will be pleased when it's finished.

Would it be impertinent to ask whether your list had any of the issues listed in Quarryscapes' post above (post 81)?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Ok some won't buy it because in their opinion something isn't quite right and that's fine.

 

I don't want to seem churlish, but it's not an opinion that the model has certain inaccuracies - it is a fact that has been proven.

 

The opinion comes into play at the stage when an individual decides if they want to overlook the faults and buy the model.

 

I would really love to know how these issues actually arise in models where there is a prototype to measure, scan and photograph - is it just carelessness, or a technical glitch causing distortion or dislocation during the design process?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to seem churlish, but it's not an opinion that the model has certain inaccuracies - it is a fact that has been proven.

 

The opinion comes into play at the stage when an individual decides if they want to overlook the faults and buy the model.

 

I would really love to know how these issues actually arise in models where there is a prototype to measure, scan and photograph - is it just carelessness, or a technical glitch causing distortion or dislocation during the design process?

 

Actually it is very easy.  First it depends on whether or not you do a scan (now getting very expensive incidentally) and if you do it then has to be 'interpreted into a file which will make sense to a CAD designer so getting the dimensions and relationships right apart from which picking up reflections during the scanning, or even flaking paintwork, can lead to things which need interpretation as the 'finished' file is prepared.  So a scan needs to be accompanied by a mass of photo and you need to know what to photograph.

 

The alternative is to use a drawing - step one being to find an accurate one; and how do you know it's accurate anyway - so lots of careful research plus of course you need to establish what the drawing purports to represent, very important if something has changed over the years.  The designer also needs lots of photos to refer to for detail and here can come a big stumbling block because unless whoever it is who happens to supply those photos knows what they're at they can sometimes cause more confusion than they solve.  

 

So let's say you scan the Dean Goods at Swindon - there's real one there so all should be plain sailing of course, provide all is interpreted properly and that Dean Goods happens to present one or two scanning problems which could well lead to rivet heads appearing on splashers or the shape of the firebox being not quite right.  Now the designer is in China, in all probability he knows very little about British railway engines but he might be sufficiently interested to cast around the 'net looking for images and there happen to be plenty of Dean Goods.  But here comes the next problem, which could also result from stuff the designer receives from England because those photos might represent a dozen different engines over a period of 50 years and there will inevitably be detail differences.  So what does the designer go for - well he reads the spec and follows it, which takes you back to someone in England getting the spec properly detailed in the first place, which can be quite a task fora Dean Goods if you don't happen to know all that much about them.

 

So in practice it's probably far easier to get something wrong than it is to get it right on a class with numerous changes and differences over the years.  Make a  94XX and its relatively easy, make something like a Dean Goods and it gets difficult, make a 517 and it's the nearest equivalent to a designers (or even specifier's) hell on earth.

 

So far we;'ve done the easy bit.  the next stage is looking at 3-D prints and/or EPs and making sure they're right - looking at a CAD is one thing, looking at an EP is rather different and is the stage when you can really pick up errors - but you have to know what you're looking at and what you want, and then get it back to the factory on the other side of the world in a way which they can understand.  and people wonder why it takes so long to develop accurate models - or indeed any models.  Oh, and we haven't even got to the livery samples yet.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that in this case (for instance) none of the Dean Goods would have had the wash out plugs underneath the boiler handrail, so these features must have "crept" somehow, and I would have thought a careful inspection of any of the side elevation drawings of a Dean Goods would have revealed the error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it is very easy.  First it depends on whether or not you do a scan (now getting very expensive incidentally) and if you do it then has to be 'interpreted into a file which will make sense to a CAD designer so getting the dimensions and relationships right apart from which picking up reflections during the scanning, or even flaking paintwork, can lead to things which need interpretation as the 'finished' file is prepared.  So a scan needs to be accompanied by a mass of photo and you need to know what to photograph.

 

The alternative is to use a drawing - step one being to find an accurate one; and how do you know it's accurate anyway - so lots of careful research plus of course you need to establish what the drawing purports to represent, very important if something has changed over the years.  The designer also needs lots of photos to refer to for detail and here can come a big stumbling block because unless whoever it is who happens to supply those photos knows what they're at they can sometimes cause more confusion than they solve.  

 

So let's say you scan the Dean Goods at Swindon - there's real one there so all should be plain sailing of course, provide all is interpreted properly and that Dean Goods happens to present one or two scanning problems which could well lead to rivet heads appearing on splashers or the shape of the firebox being not quite right.  Now the designer is in China, in all probability he knows very little about British railway engines but he might be sufficiently interested to cast around the 'net looking for images and there happen to be plenty of Dean Goods.  But here comes the next problem, which could also result from stuff the designer receives from England because those photos might represent a dozen different engines over a period of 50 years and there will inevitably be detail differences.  So what does the designer go for - well he reads the spec and follows it, which takes you back to someone in England getting the spec properly detailed in the first place, which can be quite a task fora Dean Goods if you don't happen to know all that much about them.

 

So in practice it's probably far easier to get something wrong than it is to get it right on a class with numerous changes and differences over the years.  Make a  94XX and its relatively easy, make something like a Dean Goods and it gets difficult, make a 517 and it's the nearest equivalent to a designers (or even specifier's) hell on earth.

 

So far we;'ve done the easy bit.  the next stage is looking at 3-D prints and/or EPs and making sure they're right - looking at a CAD is one thing, looking at an EP is rather different and is the stage when you can really pick up errors - but you have to know what you're looking at and what you want, and then get it back to the factory on the other side of the world in a way which they can understand.  and people wonder why it takes so long to develop accurate models - or indeed any models.  Oh, and we haven't even got to the livery samples yet.

 

Insightful.

 

I can see how errors creep in.  On the basis of your explanation, the obvious point in the process for spotting these errors is when China hands things back and there is a 3D print or EP to check. 

 

The way not to do things is to fail to make adequate checks at this stage, so it is left to a bunch of amateurs on a website to spot the errors for you.

 

A haphazard outcome is the result.  Some things get corrected in time, others do not.

 

So, Oxford has the firebox crease pointed out.  I would guess that it is pointed out in time for Oxford to do something about it without derailing its plans; Oxford send a friendly email acknowledgment and, lo and behold, in due course a correction appears.  Credit to Oxford.

 

But, there are many more errors.  These come to light later, and in stages.  It is a haphazard process with haphazard results. So, I need to do some mugging up, and I have concentrated on the suitability of the tooling for the pre-Grouping lined 2309 (aka The Angry Caterpillar).  I spot some issues, but not others.  Several fundamental issues are identified by forum members at this point.  By the time I have collated and emailed our, by then, collective snag list, I am assuming that it is a little late in the day for Oxford.  My email is ignored.

 

More people emerge, identifying more issues.  The advent of Miss Prism confirms some concerns (e.g. cab cut out) and spots others (e.g. the masking of the washout plugs).  Far too late for Oxford.

 

Enter the Locomotion announcement.  2516 appears to have exactly the same tooling as the other Deans, yet the OP suggests this has been signed off by the NRM curators.  How can this be? 

 

Well, it hadn't been NRM vetted, we learn, so, thanks to this commission, an opportunity has been created for Oxford to revisit the errors.  The Big Question is whether or not those errors that are deemed correctable at this late stage will be sufficient to render this a basically accurate model.

 

Let us hope so.

 

What I take from this course of events is that:

 

  • This is model making by the seat of Oxford's pants, and not to be emulated or recommended! 

 

  • Oxford probably get that

.

  • None of this is Locomotion's fault

 

  • We should not fall out about it on this forum
Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be impertinent to ask whether your list had any of the issues listed in Quarryscapes' post above (post 81)?

 
 “All of them plus some others you haven’t raised! 
 
Don’t forget, what you have seen is an EP and from a lot of experience we have had, they never come without issues and this is no different. We will get to the best (optimum) solution we can with the help and support of Oxford Rail who are working very closely and cooperatively with us. We may have to face some economic constraints which exist on a product not designed uniquely for the NRM. As Stationmaster correctly points out, variations within GWR classes is huge and a potential design nightmare for a model producer. Just to be clear we are not trying to model 2516 in the condition it is currently in at Steam as it would be multiple shades of green if we were! In that respect, the real thing has errors! The target is to achieve, within the constraints of the rrp, as accurate a version as we can get it for how it was in the period 1928 - 1934, which the locomotive in Steam was preserved to try to represent when it was withdrawn and restored. 
 
It is a new partnership for us and both parties want it to be a success and are working towards that goal. However we came to the project quite late and therefore were not in a position to influence the early stages of this particular model, but we can and will now help Oxford Rail improve some of the detail issues with 2516 from the EP you have seen.
From what we have now seen, this Dean Goods is fundamentally very well produced, assembled and finished, feels like a quality product, runs sweetly and sounds good. We will continue to work at the detail design issues as far as we possibly can until we have exhausted all of the economic possibilities.
Interestingly early sales and reservations have been very strong indeed since the launch last Saturday so clearly this is going to be very popular.”
Edited by LocomotionatShildon
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been following this thread with fascination. The knowledge displayed is far beyond what I know about the subject. However, one thing I think is sometimes neglected in RTR is consistency. To take one example, the driving wheels of Hornby’s current Duchess. The centre pair has a thinner tyre than the other pairs. I don’t think it would matter much if all the drivers had thin tyres or all had thick – it is the inconsistency which jars. Closer to topic, The Airfix idea of conventional metal-tyred driving wheels combined with plastic tender wheels looked awful. It has been pointed out that the lining on Oxford’s model is over scale. What I haven’t seen noted is that the lining is gloss whereas the body colour is not. I hasten to add that Oxford is not alone in this. If lining is thin and insignia is small, sometimes this is not very noticable but in this case the overscale lining makes the contrast stand out to my eye.

 

Of course, Locomotion’s version will not be lined but even if it were, an overall coat of varnish would solve that little problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the thread since Saturday, I'm sure what can be corrected will. Given its a good cause that will benefit, I placed my order last night. The above post from Locomotion is a vindication of that decision

 

David

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean we'll get the top feed as an accessory we can fit ourselves, since it is clearly visible in the photo of the loco in traffic in it's days when it carried this livery? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is the step as well of transposing the initial CAD drawings into the separate injection mould tool drawings - each mould tool will have a drawing for the general assembly, fixed half (the show faces), the moving half + slides, ejection system etc. These drawings are very complex and are mirror images of the initial CAD's, they will for example have maybe a hot runner system and certainly a cooling system. Incidentally I have not seen any manufacturer share these drawings in all my model railway time!!

The tool maker will generally sort out electrodes to do the spark erosion bits (you never get separate drawings for electrodes)- this is because he is the best person who understands how to do that part.

These electrodes are transposed back again to be a replica of what you are making... back and forward with transpositions!!

My feeling on the wash out plugs is that the tool maker may have made a 1mm mistake when doing the set up of the spark erosion process - remember once its done its done. No one from quality comes and checks what his set up is and if he has put the correct dimensions in! Generally the tool maker will only become aware of a mistake when he's bollocked days or even weeks later once samples are assembled.

To be honest it may have been picked up in China but it may not.

What no one is going to do is say to us here are the samples and we have made mistakes here or there and get a white pen and mark on the models!

The manufacturers are really under pressure to show samples at Warley - what would have been a better call not showing a sample or showing one with say a known error - remember just because Locomotion may not have been aware doesn't mean that the engineers in China aren't aware!

Lets just wait and see what the next samples look like (these are after all EP's) - I'm sure there will be corrections, maybe not all but there will be some.

 

Stuart

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh.

 

That's quite a game-changer.

 

Wasn't 2516 super-heated in October 1935?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing we all need to understand - and of course some will already understand it - is that some changes are easier to make than others and in many cases the ability to actually make any sort of change will be limited by the arrangement of the tooling.  Once any model has gone past a certain stage in tooling development changes become much more difficult.  For example it is, assuming the correct face of the tool is readily accessible, far simpler to add rivet heads than it is to remove them (don't forget that a rivet equals a depression machined into the tool face and you would perhaps be looking at a completely new tool as simply trying to fill the depressions won't necessarily work effectively in injection moulding.

 

We know from Sandra's (Locomotion's) post that the NRM folk have put in the effort and identified a number of shortcomings/errors against what they want from the model and probably they have access to more information about the engine than many of us do so they could have been working from that in addition to what has been said in this thread.  In addition as MissP has noted, and I now understand from their recent comment,  Locomotion are talking about something a bit different from the current museum state of 2516 so time now, I think, to give them breathing space and see what they can manage.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.