Oxford Rail Annouce 4-Wheel Toad

[sparaxis]

Do you mean something like this one?

Wrong company, but it does illustrate the potential traps of making a model from the real thing.

Bernard

DSC_0059.JPG

Hehehe.

 

Reminds of my elderly Wrenn BR labeled as "NE" brake van in grey.

[Mark Saunders]

It should be obvious to all that Oxford are producing cheap & cheerful and will no doubt find it very profitable. 

 

If you really want cheap and cheerful ask them to change the handrails to moulded ones thicken up the mouldings so the tooling lasts for years, add all plastic wheels plus just one body style in several liveries!

 

Mark Saunders

[Covkid]

Hehehe.

 

Reminds of my elderly Wrenn BR labeled as "NE" brake van in grey.

Reminds me of the Wrenn nee Hornby Dublo 0-6-2 tank painted in Big Four liveries 

[coachmann]

BUT, "Serious modelers" need to look elsewhere. I'm am a pretty serious modeler when it comes to my mainstream interests (DB in Bavaria, 1957-1961), but I am not adverse to letting something less serious (and out of country) escape onto the mainline from time to time.

You're probably right. I am not a serous modeller.

[dibber25]

I think that the 'perfect' model is possible in 'OO' ready-to-run but ONLY if you get it right first time. Most of what is seen and criticised on here is too late to correct without incurring costs. A judgement then has to be made as to whether those costs can be absorbed or not. All too often the answer has to be 'No', because other factors such as exchange rates and cost increases in materials and labour are already pushing costs in the wrong direction. Brian Greenwood's comments about the Dean Goods retooling are a perfect summary of the situation. Correcting the errant rivets is one retooling too far and is simply unaffordable. However, maybe we've reached a point where we need to just set our sights a little lower. Should we really expect half a dozen perfect detail variants of a particular vehicle? There was a time when we had one version, we were satisfied,  and we made our own changes. If we settled for that, we might reasonably expect it to be acceptably accurate for that one version. The more variation we introduce, the more complex the tooling and the more expensive to re-tool or modify it. (CJL)

[dibber25]

You're probably right. I am not a serous modeller.

I think that's the funniest thing I've ever read on RMweb!! (CJL)

[tomparryharry]

I think that the 'perfect' model is possible in 'OO' ready-to-run but ONLY if you get it right first time. Most of what is seen and criticised on here is too late to correct without incurring costs. A judgement then has to be made as to whether those costs can be absorbed or not. All too often the answer has to be 'No', because other factors such as exchange rates and cost increases in materials and labour are already pushing costs in the wrong direction. Brian Greenwood's comments about the Dean Goods retooling are a perfect summary of the situation. Correcting the errant rivets is one retooling too far and is simply unaffordable. However, maybe we've reached a point where we need to just set our sights a little lower. Should we really expect half a dozen perfect detail variants of a particular vehicle? There was a time when we had one version, we were satisfied,  and we made our own changes. If we settled for that, we might reasonably expect it to be acceptably accurate for that one version. The more variation we introduce, the more complex the tooling and the more expensive to re-tool or modify it. (CJL)

I think your post hits the nail fairly & squarely on the head:- "Get it right first time". Oxford have had opportunities to turn out a little cracker. Sadly this time, just short of the mark. If however, Oxford put up a pre-production sample, then the rider is this:- "We intend to produce this model. We intend to get as close to 100% as possible. Anyone wanting to comment on 'improvements' should substantiate your recommendations supported by source material. Should a comment be noted, then a commentator will be gratefully & duly acknowledged. Should no comments not be forthcoming, then we intend to commence production of the model".

 

Some of the posters on here do indeed have prime source material. It's not beyond the wit of man to actually ask about things. Communication is the keyword here. If you foist upon a product that misses some of the mark, you're either very lucky, or very disappointed. Caveat Emptor:- Let the buyer beware.

 

Ian.

[Guy Rixon]

Concerning the bogosity of some heritage railways and stock, I recently saw an interesting document re the rebuilding of the Lynton and Barnstable railway. The organisation proposing this are currently seeking planning permission to reinstate much of the track on the original route. The planning authorities, apparently, require that the rebuild be truly authentic and not "pseudo-historical".

[tomparryharry]

Concerning the bogosity of some heritage railways and stock, I recently saw an interesting document re the rebuilding of the Lynton and Barnstable railway. The organisation proposing this are currently seeking planning permission to reinstate much of the track on the original route. The planning authorities, apparently, require that the rebuild be truly authentic and not "pseudo-historical".

If I know of Martyn Budd at Lynton & Barnstaple, that's exactly of what he'll try to achieve. There will no doubt be a dose of pragmatism, but I do believe that all of the team at Woody Bay are going the same way. I would like to go back there sometime. Haven't been there for years.

 

Ian

[sparaxis]

You're probably right. I am not a serous modeller.

Nope, you are a serious modeler, not a "Serious Modeller".  It's all about attitude. I agree with Dibber25. I had a good laugh at that one!

 

The question is: Do you want a neat more-or-less accurate representation of something that was scrapped before many of us were born, or are you such a stickler for detail that you want of model of "it" as it was on midday on the 14th of June  in 1935, but you "cannot" make a model because you don't have the "right" photograph.

 

Jokes about seriousness aside, Oxford has done some truly bizarre things so far.

[BG John]

The question is: Do you want a neat more-or-less accurate representation of something that was scrapped before many of us were born, or are you such a stickler for detail that you want of model of "it" as it was on midday on the 14th of June  in 1935, but you "cannot" make a model because you don't have the "right" photograph.

I'm intending to convert one of mine to a version for which there is no photo!

[sparaxis]

I am sure that with a little effort and a lick of paint and transfers the more glaring errors can be put right. Mine's going to be back dated to somewhere around 1910. 

Certainly less effort than the GCR 6 wheel brake van I am building to go with my Pom Pom.

 

Just a pity that Oxford seems to always mess up a potentially great model due to carelessness.

The NE cattle wagon is one that stands out as particularly frustrating. Wonderfully reproduced brake rigging but no Vacuum cylinder.

One right side and one identical wrong side. (I suppose you could argue that you can only see one side of a wagon at a time)

And to top it off, choosing the 9'wb version that barely made it into BR days when they could have just as easily done the 10'wb version.

 

Sure, a lot of information has been lost, but the appropriate reference books can usually be found if you try.

[Garethp8873]

I am sure that with a little effort and a lick of paint and transfers the more glaring errors can be put right. Mine's going to be back dated to somewhere around 1910. 

Certainly less effort than the GCR 6 wheel brake van I am building to go with my Pom Pom.

 

Just a pity that Oxford seems to always mess up a potentially great model due to carelessness.

The NE cattle wagon is one that stands out as particularly frustrating. Wonderfully reproduced brake rigging but no Vacuum cylinder.

One right side and one identical wrong side. (I suppose you could argue that you can only see one side of a wagon at a time)

And to top it off, choosing the 9'wb version that barely made it into BR days when they could have just as easily done the 10'wb version.

 

Sure, a lot of information has been lost, but the appropriate reference books can usually be found if you try.

 

Using the excellent advice from Nile here on RMWeb, I sent my one BR and three LNER examples to a friend who modified them to represent Dia.39s. Then they were forwarded to my friend who deals with painting and lettering. I just now await them to return along with several others in the near future hopefully...

 

I was one of the many who was excited when they announced the LNER Cattle wagon as I felt whilst the GWR and LMS examples were not upto scratch for me, it still meant we could now show off a rake along with the future Hornby SR Maunsell/Bulleid Cattle wagons.

 

When I saw them in the flesh I was very annoyed. I was further annoyed with the email reply I received in regards to them to this year. I found this laughable:

 

 

If you’ve any original photos or a suggested source book, rahter than secondary sources for us, then I can see if we can obtain a copy.

 

Surely their researchers should already have this knowledge to hand...?

 

I have already informed my one friend that the Toads maybe visiting him for work...

Edited August 15, 2017 by Garethp8873

[Dunsignalling]

I'm intending to convert one of mine to a version for which there is no photo!

I which case, who's to tell you if you get it right or wrong?

[BG John]

I which case, who's to tell you if you get it right or wrong?

Not the person who compiled the Broad Gauge Society Data Sheet on it, as he's probably sitting on a cloud discussing the broad gauge with IKB!

[lofty1966]

I am sure that with a little effort and a lick of paint and transfers the more glaring errors can be put right. Mine's going to be back dated to somewhere around 1910. 

Certainly less effort than the GCR 6 wheel brake van I am building to go with my Pom Pom.

 

Just a pity that Oxford seems to always mess up a potentially great model due to carelessness.

The NE cattle wagon is one that stands out as particularly frustrating. Wonderfully reproduced brake rigging but no Vacuum cylinder.

One right side and one identical wrong side. (I suppose you could argue that you can only see one side of a wagon at a time)

And to top it off, choosing the 9'wb version that barely made it into BR days when they could have just as easily done the 10'wb version.

 P

Sure, a lot of information has been lost, but the appropriate reference books can usually be found if you try.

Carelessness or not that bothered ?

[tomparryharry]

Using the excellent advice from Nile here on RMWeb, I sent my one BR and three LNER examples to a friend who modified them to represent Dia.39s. Then they were forwarded to my friend who deals with painting and lettering. I just now await them to return along with several others in the near future hopefully...

 

I was one of the many who was excited when they announced the LNER Cattle wagon as I felt whilst the GWR and LMS examples were not upto scratch for me, it still meant we could now show off a rake along with the future Hornby SR Maunsell/Bulleid Cattle wagons.

 

When I saw them in the flesh I was very annoyed. I was further annoyed with the email reply I received in regards to them to this year. I found this laughable:

 

 

Surely their researchers should already have this knowledge to hand...?

No, and that's just the problem. It is unreasonable to expect researchers to know every bolt & rivet on a subject. But, asking pertinent questions will unearth much additional information to help raise the bar. If no-one is talking to Oxford, then either:- a, no-one's listening, or:- b, someone's feeding incorrect information. I find it difficult that Oxford would commit to tooling, before getting the subject matter as close to 'right' as possible. A toad brake van is probably the most iconic & individualistic wagon on the Great Western. Admittedly, having some 1,000 vans, over 60+ years, will create traps for the unwary, but there are ways & means to minimise the traps.

 

I don't like picking on Oxford. I think it's unfair to sit at a keyboard, and type without recrimination. I do wish Oxford well, it just seems lost in translation.

 

And yes, I will probably buy both a 4 & 6 wheel variation.

 

Ian

[The Stationmaster]

Carelessness or not that bothered ?

 

Not exactly either I suspect but rather more a result of the way in which they would appear to work.  Let's face it if you offer a Chinese designer/production engineer CAD file and a pile of photos of something like a Dean Goods the first thing he's likely to do is scratch his head in a mixture of amazement and confusion which will only get worse as he looks at the details.  Equally f you give him a picture of a brakevan with part of the handrails missing is hardly likely to know that they are missing and the same might be said of a vehicle with sheeted lower sides and planked ends - he will work on the information he has within the budget he has been given.

 

Even other manufacturers and commissioners get hammered on here because of perceived errors - often when they've put a major amount of effort into research and done their level best to identify all the little quirks and foibles in order to arrive at something which can be developed and made within budget.  I'm all too aware of one instance where although an original works drawing was used (always a dangerous practice anyway) a component was missed off a CAD because it wasn't on the drawing and wasn't readily visible on photos - ultimately put right in good time but still an example of how small errors, of omission in this case, can creep in.   Not exactly 'carelessness' or 'can't be bothered' but perhaps what sometimes used to be seen on school reports in years gone by in respect of not fully appreciating the subject.

[asmay2002]

I think that the 'perfect' model is possible in 'OO' ready-to-run but ONLY if you get it right first time. Most of what is seen and criticised on here is too late to correct without incurring costs. A judgement then has to be made as to whether those costs can be absorbed or not. All too often the answer has to be 'No', because other factors such as exchange rates and cost increases in materials and labour are already pushing costs in the wrong direction. Brian Greenwood's comments about the Dean Goods retooling are a perfect summary of the situation. Correcting the errant rivets is one retooling too far and is simply unaffordable. However, maybe we've reached a point where we need to just set our sights a little lower. Should we really expect half a dozen perfect detail variants of a particular vehicle? There was a time when we had one version, we were satisfied,  and we made our own changes. If we settled for that, we might reasonably expect it to be acceptably accurate for that one version. The more variation we introduce, the more complex the tooling and the more expensive to re-tool or modify it. (CJL)

Other manufacturers are being open with their CAD designs fairly early on and exposing them to the enthusiast community.  This approach means that mistakes/faults are picked up for them free of charge by modellers.  In contrast Oxford are very secretive and keep cocking things up that they don't need to get wrong. They could get a lot of free help if they wanted to before commiting too much money but choose not to. 

[cctransuk]

..... but perhaps what sometimes used to be seen on school reports in years gone by in respect of not fully appreciating the subject.

 

Could do better, if he put in a little more effort and dropped the 'That'll do" attitude !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Guy Rixon]

Not exactly either I suspect but rather more a result of the way in which they would appear to work.  Let's face it if you offer a Chinese designer/production engineer CAD file and a pile of photos of something like a Dean Goods the first thing he's likely to do is scratch his head in a mixture of amazement and confusion which will only get worse as he looks at the details.  Equally f you give him a picture of a brakevan with part of the handrails missing is hardly likely to know that they are missing and the same might be said of a vehicle with sheeted lower sides and planked ends - he will work on the information he has within the budget he has been given.

 

 

Yes, this is a possible source of the errors, but it is an utterly wrong way to do the job! If there is somebody at Oxford who knows how the subject should look, then they absolutely should not delegate to somebody who doesn't unless they (Oxford) check the result. And if they can't spot at least the big mistakes, like the spurious planking, then they are not checking properly.

 

Alternatively, if they do check, and they find the big errors, and they don't get them fixed because money, then they are doing it all wrong. They need a much tighter spec before outsourcing a design.

[coachmann]

Yes, this is a possible source of the errors, but it is an utterly wrong way to do the job! If there is somebody at Oxford who knows how the subject should look, then they absolutely should not delegate to somebody who doesn't unless they (Oxford) check the result. And if they can't spot at least the big mistakes, like the spurious planking, then they are not checking properly.

 

Alternatively, if they do check, and they find the big errors, and they don't get them fixed because money, then they are doing it all wrong. They need a much tighter spec before outsourcing a design.

China is a long way away and someone would need to be out there on the spot all the time checking progress. Manufacturing life isn't as simple as you might think.

Edited August 16, 2017 by coachmann

[81C]

I'll be painting mine in camouflage so none of you lot can see it.                

[217 RIVER FLESK]

Oh well, another own goal by Oxford & no sale to me.

 

The only thing that is happy is my wallet, as it's staying clamped shut.

 

Disappointed

[Dunsignalling]

There's nothing new or uniquely Chinese about any of this. Neither is it confined to the CAD process

  

Remember the Lima Horsebox? The prototype had four lamp-tops on the roof,.arranged asymmetrically.

 

All four could be seen on both the side and end elevation drawings. The toolmaker presumably didn't have a plan view to consult and interpreted the layout to be 4 x 4.

 

When the model emerged, it was therefore festooned with sixteen of them.   

 

John

 

Moral: To err is human but the creation of real stuff-ups is (just like most other things), easier and faster with the aid of a computer.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Dunsignalling