Jump to content

Ed-farms

DJModels at the N gauge South East show

Recommended Posts

DJ has something of a history of offering ill considered observations which really don't help him. The latest about Mk.5 coaches is consistent with his missive on others making a OO Class 87 when he walked away from his own project to make one. Not to mention his efforts to accuse Revolution and Chinese factories of nefarious practices. On the whole I think it'd be better for all if he delivered what he said he was going to deliver and avoided offering his views and wisdom to the wider world.

Edited by jjb1970
  • Like 3
  • Agree 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi everyone,

 

Just to clarify; Revolution and Accurascale has an exclusive agreement to be the only manufacturers of Mark 5 coaches in N gauge (Revolution) and OO (Accurascale). Think Dapol and the Class 68.

 

I’m sure Mr. Jones has merely been misinformed.

 

Hope that clears everything up.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

Has CAF patented their design? While livery may come under Trade Marks anyone can produce a model if the prototype is not subject to statutory protection.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bomag said:

Has CAF patented their design? While livery may come under Trade Marks anyone can produce a model if the prototype is not subject to statutory protection.

 

 

Hi there,

 

I cannot go into specifics due to commercially sensitive information across a number of companies, but it is not an exclusive agreement on a livery, it’s more than that. No company is going to grant exclusive rights on a livery, so it’s not to do with that.

 

I really don’t like commenting on threads of another company, so I think it’s best we leave it there, but felt it important to clear up this confusion instigated by DJ Models for whatever reason, be it unclear English or mistaken information. I’m sure there was nothing more to it than that.

 

Accurascale and Revolution Models has an exclusive agreement to make these models in OO and N gauge. 

 

Cheers,

 

Fran

  • Like 4
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly have no idea why Dave stirs things up like this. He has form, the behaviour around outing Revolution's 92, and particularly in the early days, his constant references to being a professional and not doing this as a part timer (a habit he has fortunately desisted from given his relatively poor delivery performance). Instead of playing games, perhaps he should just get on with what is supposed to be doing.

 

People wonder why DJM gets such a panning at times. His casual statement about the mark 5s is a good example of how a large proportion has been brought on by himself.

  • Agree 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is done to deflect attention away from him, he has form over many years. I seem to remember him doing it when at Dapol to Hornby and Bachman. His Cl74 was announced as he heard Hornby were working on one, his mermaid because I and Dapol were working to crowdfund one. Cl92 to get at Revolution for taking the Pendolino away from him (first announced as a DJM / Revolution product).

 

He thinks customers will feel sorry for him and back the underdog if he points out that he was going to do it, but these bigger guys have taken it away from him.

 

This is of course only my personal observations and thoughts and could be completely wrong.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree; even mentioning the mk5 was pointless. DJM was beaten to it by manufacturers with a proven track record of actually delivering models.... as an N gauger, my frame of reference is RevolutioN - if I were given the choice of a RevolutioN mk5, which I’m confident will be delivered in a timely manner, versus DJM mk5, with almost no record of delivering tangible models, I don’t think there is even any choice to make!!!

 

i wish DJM every success, but he really needs to crack on with delivering tangible models. Personally, as it stands, I wouldn’t even consider placing any orders with DJM (regardless of what he announces), until he’s delivered three or four successful N gauge projects, so I have the benefit of hindsight in terms of likely timeframe and quality.

 

I also think that with the crowdfunding (money up front) funding mechanism, it’s really important that the lead time is an absolute minimum, so it’s critical that DJM identifies [and only announces] projects that are likely to rapidly progress to manufacturing. Of course, no one is immune from ‘difficult’ crowdfunded projects; the RevolutioN Cl 321 being the obvious example from them - I have lots of money tied up in that, but I am at least confident it will eventually be delivered.... I don’t have that confidence with DJM, regrettably.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi there,

 

I cannot go into specifics due to commercially sensitive information across a number of companies, but it is not an exclusive agreement on a livery, it’s more than that. No company is going to grant exclusive rights on a livery, so it’s not to do with that.

 

I really don’t like commenting on threads of another company, so I think it’s best we leave it there, but felt it important to clear up this confusion instigated by DJ Models for whatever reason, be it unclear English or mistaken information. I’m sure there was nothing more to it than that.

 

Accurascale and Revolution Models has an exclusive agreement to make these models in OO and N gauge. 

 

Cheers,

 

Fran

 

You have not really answered my query as to whether you are saying you consider the form of a 'Mk5' is protected. While the MK5a DSO may be difficult to model without a scan the rest of the coaches could be quite easily knocked up in CAD from the published drawings and few photos of the real thing to get profile shapes etc. Do you mean that you have exclusive access to the design data and cooperation?

 

In respect of other posts it does seem to verge on ad homimen attacks. I have no problem with people not being positive about DJM models (the GDPR section on his website isn't great) , but compared to the generally more muted response to the bloke from Hornby about the 66s and Terrier it does seem almost personal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Bomag,

 

It's a good question.  I'll try to give a comprehensive answer; those who get bored by this stuff please pass by!

 

One of the fundamental rights we have enshrined in UK/EU law is freedom of expression.

 

This can be interpreted to mean that I can make a facsimile image (2d drawing/photograph or 3D sculpture/model) of anything I like and no one can stop me.

 

Certainly model companies in Europe have successfully challenged car makers who've tried to limit models of their vehicles being produced, though as far as I am aware the law has not been tested in the UK yet, and I am certainly not claiming to be enough to a legal expert to give any kind of opinion on what a learned judge would rule!

 

However, obtaining a licence is about a lot more than that.  From our point of view, it gives a far better guarantee of accuracy by granting access to manufacturer drawings and CAD, and close up visits to record the kind of tiny details on the prototype that are sometimes hard to gauge, or absent, from drawings.

 

And of course, it offers the opportunity to assess changes made post introduction - for example the toilet retention  tank pipes have been moved; this is not reflected in the works drawings but is something we can ensure is correct on the models after having been showed it during a depot visit facilitated by CAF last month.  There are other areas where changes have been made to the "off the drawing board" vehicles too.

 

Also, there is the question of trademarked livery elements to consider.  The Caledonian Sleeper branding is controlled by the Scottish Government, and as a general principle they will grant it to all comers for a consideration, but the TPE markings are not.  And what of the myriad smaller markings and warnings?  Again, some of these are hard to record unless you can get close to the vehicles or access to the decal elements themselves.

 

So in answer to your question "Do we consider the form of the Mk5 to be protected" I would say possibly not, but that is not a definitive answer as the issue has not yet come before a court to my knowledge.

 

But even if we ignore the DSO I don't believe your next statement ("...the rest of the coaches could be quite easily knocked up in CAD from the published drawings and few photos of the real thing to get profile shapes etc") stands up to scrutiny when we consider the levels of accuracy - especially of underframe parts - now expected by enthusiasts.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 6
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

On the whole I think it'd be better for all if he delivered what he said he was going to deliver and avoided offering his views and wisdom to the wider world.

 

DJM models is at a point where he needs to think carefully about what he says publicly given the unfortunate track record the company has developed.

 

In his announcement that he would be attending the show he had the following sentence:

 

Quote

I’m also hoping to ‘launch’ a surprise or 2 on the day!

 

Unless it is being held secret by anyone who gave him money on the weekend, there doesn't appear to have been anything significant, surprise or otherwise, at the show.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

King Limited Edition announced that gets the King over the line and the MK5 coaches announced and cancelled in same sentence. I may be missing something as I was not they so posting from a very sedentary position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the king getting over the line with the help of a sound equipped edition is a significant announcement and a welcome surprise. The state of all the other projects was also an interesting announcement. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news about the Shark - hopefully here for Christmas.

 

Paddy

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.