Jump to content
 

Heljan 7mm Class 56


delticfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Ben, Brian and team Heljan, thanks for sharing the 56 CAD recently. It looks like with a little more time spent you’ll be on the road to a top model. I’ve pulled together a list of core issues with the model CAD that can help you correct it. I know how time consuming and difficult it can be to make things right on CAD so hope this fresh view helps you correct the artwork so you can bring a decent model to market. I know lots of us are really excited by this model and want to support you bring out a great model of the 56 :sungum:

 

HJ 56 recommendations final pdf.pdf

 

Cheers

 

Tom

HJ issue 3 and 6.jpg

HJ issue 4 7 8 & 9.jpg

HJ 56 image issues 1 2 .jpg

HJ issue 3 & 5 .jpg

Edited by tomstaf
wrong file type used
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done for posting these Tom. It's really clear from the side-by-side photos above where some of the key issues lie.

 

The other thing to perhaps mention is the side grilles (as seen on photo 4/8/9 above). The CADs make this look like two very distinct grilles. On the prototype they are separated, but as you can see from the prototype photo next to it, with the livery applied, they 'blend in' as one. 

 

It's a pity that the typical process is for CADs to get signed off and then tools made before any sample livery application is applied. The application of the livery (at CAD time) could serve to highlight subtle shape-related problems early-on in the development process.

 

Guy

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hal Nail said:

Bit late guys! CADs were reported as being signed off a while back.

 

So 3rd October CAD is shared with Heljan 'welcoming comments'. 16th October CAD is signed off.

 

Is this really enough time to properly elicit feedback?

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, lyneux said:

 

So 3rd October CAD is shared with Heljan 'welcoming comments'. 16th October CAD is signed off.

 

Is this really enough time to properly elicit feedback?

I'm always wary of repeating conversations but I have spoken to them about feedback peviously and the gist of the response was it is a lot of effort to filter the good from the rubbish, so they prefer to check themselves.

 

I do have some sympathy as often on here CADs come out with something looking fundamentally wrong and all sorts of other relatively minor issues get discussed at length - often speculation rather than facts - such that the major problem is almost lost.

 

I don't compromise when buying so personally I'm firmly in the take help (such as the excellent pics above) and get it right camp.

Edited by Hal Nail
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 05/11/2019 at 09:46, Hal Nail said:

I'm always wary of repeating conversations but I have spoken to them about feedback peviously and the gist of the response was it is a lot of effort to filter the good from the rubbish, so they prefer to check themselves.

 

I do have some sympathy as often on here CADs come out with something looking fundamentally wrong and all sorts of other relatively minor issues get discussed at length - often speculation rather than facts - such that the major problem is almost lost.

 

I don't compromise when buying so personally I'm firmly in the take help (such as the excellent pics above) and get it right camp.

 

I saw it on FB where it mentioned it was a first draft of the CAD and invited feedback so trying to help them. It does seem strange if they've finished it already bearing in mind they only posted it a few weeks back. CAD can accidentally go awry sometimes so best to shout whilst they've got time to address the issues though :)

 

Cheers

 

Tom

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Some images of the O gauge Class 56.

It has become a norm now, Heljan will never accept feedback from the CAD stage. Seriously some of the errors leave me wondering whether anyone at Heljan actually care about what they make? Do they actually compare their own CAD with pictures of the real thing? Errors from the CAD stage are still present unfortunately. Tom has highlighted the errors perfectly well a few posts up.

 

115405406_3390981927631316_1376972140600911323_n.jpg

115840490_3390981834297992_2906080239713805103_n.jpg

115735151_3390981910964651_5308912805344029734_n.jpg

109933644_3390981850964657_4766405801422889356_n.jpg

Edited by MGR Hooper!
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really disappointing that none of the errors pointed out have been corrected. I'd hoped the new people at Heljan UK would have put a stop (or at least reduced) these daft errors creeping in to what are in most respects decent models.

 

 

Edited by admiles
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 04/11/2019 at 18:31, tomstaf said:

Hi Ben, Brian and team Heljan, thanks for sharing the 56 CAD recently. It looks like with a little more time spent you’ll be on the road to a top model. I’ve pulled together a list of core issues with the model CAD that can help you correct it. I know how time consuming and difficult it can be to make things right on CAD so hope this fresh view helps you correct the artwork so you can bring a decent model to market. I know lots of us are really excited by this model and want to support you bring out a great model of the 56 :sungum:

 

HJ 56 recommendations final pdf.pdf 33.44 kB · 43 downloads

 

Cheers

 

Tom

HJ issue 3 and 6.jpg

HJ issue 4 7 8 & 9.jpg

HJ 56 image issues 1 2 .jpg

HJ issue 3 & 5 .jpg

3 and 5? Pointing out what? Overhang of gutter....and the picture above of Fertis 69 shows a much less pronounced overhang in normal lighting, and the model looks better than the CAD too. Not sure what you are trying to prove here but it looks like a 56 to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps there are gutter differences between Donny and Romanian builds ? 086/093 do appear to have bigger cab gutter overhangs. Yes it looks like a 56 but the head on image shows the roof profile should be more of a constant dome shape as show in 1 not flatter towards the cab side windows.

 

Edited by tractor_37260
correct text
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that’s your lot boys based on Heljans previous what you see is what we’ll get. Sort of resigned myself to that so ordered 2, blue and large logo can’t wait. I think they’ll fly off the shelves but I do agree it’s a shame not to spend just a little bit longer on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I do hope not.  They did revise the class 50 quite significantly after the first EP.  But, to my eye, even a good Brian Daniels paint job can't disguise the numerous errors which, between them, mean that this does not look quite like a 56.  The mechanism will be superb, the bogies look like works of art, but the cab remains fundamental - and it is really not good (and no amount of debates about the differences between various batches of loco can, to my eye, obscure that fact).  Fingers crossed for some further work on this lovely loco.  

Edited by uk_pm
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 47606odin said:

I thought this is listed as the painted engineering prototype, the one that was grey and just been painted by Brian Daniels 

I think when you see the painted sample it’s usually what you end up getting. I think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
13 hours ago, delticfan said:

I think when you see the painted sample it’s usually what you end up getting. I think?

Not always. May vary by manufacturer but with the Dapol Mk1 coaches for example, they decided to retool but in the meantime tested liveries on the original.

 

Having said that I'll be amazed if this changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I hope they tweek it like they did with the 50.

This could be a really great sell for them if they do.

I've kept hold of my MMP kit just in case though.

 

Edited by Joner
of not if
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...