GMRC Series 2 - Episode 4 - 'Uncharted territory'

[jcm@gwr]

42 minutes ago, noiseboy72 said:

Are you saying that all the track, boards, stock, buildings and scenic items went in the skip with nothing salvaged? I find that hard to accept.

 

I know that the Titfield Thunderbolts did dismantle their layout at the end of the heat, but parts were salvaged by other teams at that point and much of the stock and other items found homes on the team's own layouts. 

 

Let's be honest, that's the fate of most layouts sooner or later. Recycling has always been a big thing in the model railway world!

 

No, to be fair all the stock and electrics/electronics were salvaged, but the boards, most of the track and scenery, 

and I believe some of the buildings went in a skip, because they weren't worth keeping!

[RJS1977]

1 hour ago, andyram said:

Interesting to read the comments about the episode as one of the “non-speaking” members of the Titfield Thunderbolts. Firstly, the branch line alluded to above  was a requirement of the show. The idea is that any semi final and final layouts bolt together to form a continuous run.

 

 

 

 Ultimately the experience was fantastic. Despite only meeting as a team of six the night before, we have become good friends. A few of us are planning a new exhibition layout based on the Huntley and Palmer factory. Hopefully we will get that done in a year although geography is against us.

 

 

 

I did wonder that about the branch line - but I wasn't sure as it didn't appear to feature on all the layouts.

 

I'd be interested in seeing the H&P layout when it's finished - I was involved in an abortive attempt to preserve one of the H&P locos a few years ago. If there's anything I can do to assist in research (my office is right opposite Reading Museum who have a large section on H&P) let me know (and if the expenses aren't too much, I'd be interested in having it at my show sometime).

[Pacific231G]

55 minutes ago, andyram said:

Interesting to read the comments about the episode as one of the “non-speaking” members of the Titfield Thunderbolts. Firstly, the branch line alluded to above  was a requirement of the show. The idea is that any semi final and final layouts bolt together to form a continuous run.

 

 As regards our layout, we suffered because of the spread out nature of the team of strangers we were. The prebuild track sections were laid by only three team members. They were responsible for the helix which was far too tight for the train to traverse. An 0-4-0 may have managed it but the captain wanted to stick with the Jinty.
 The original track plan was much simpler but the captain altered it to the more ambitious layout to include the flyover (ski-jump) and the helix. These were the areas that cost us valuable time during the first two days and left some of the scenics to be completed in a rush. A few of the team had argued this case in the build up to the show, feeling the plan was over ambitious. We knew that it would be spectacular or a crash and burn, sadly the latter became the case with the layout drifting away from the computer game theme.

 

 I was very pleased with the scenic work having completed much of it with the volcano completed on day 1 along with the main cliff area. The dock and the industrial area completed on day 2. Harun’s excellent scratchbuilding helped the effect too. Interestingly, we were told that the final marks left us one point adrift of the winners with only the functionality score costing us. That was presented very differently in the show where only provisional points were shown. 

 The reason for the British stock was because partly to fit in with the storyline. The 00 Jinty was in weathered WD livery so we chose it to fit the gun battle scene. The captain also required an off the shelf matching N gauge model. The Southern Pacific was simply chosen because of its name “Sir Francis Drake” which fitted in with the computer game story - the search for the lost treasure of the explorer of the same name.

 

 Ultimately the experience was fantastic. Despite only meeting as a team of six the night before, we have become good friends. A few of us are planning a new exhibition layout based on the Huntley and Palmer factory. Hopefully we will get that done in a year although geography is against us.

 

 Although I remained hidden for much of the show, I was pleased the shop was featured. A lovely shot of the outside as well as some interior views.

Hi Andy

Your workshop was excellent and I thought not putting the working engine front and centre was a nice subtle touch.

 

Many other teams, not just heat winners, have exhibited their GMRC layouts so I'm curious that your team  decided to dismantle immediately after the heat. I certainly wouldn't describe it as a crash and burn,  though I can imagine the frustration of the things and maybe the concepts that didn't work properly. 

 

The final scores announcement at the end is a voice-over so undoubtedly recorded after the heats had all been edited. They couldn't have known on the final day of the heat whether the runners up would, on transmission, have been known to not be capable of qualifying as the wild card. I did wonder whether the judges did some  final adjustment of the numerical scoring after the heats. They would then have seen all the teams' efforts to be able to assess who really was the best of the runners up.

 

Good luck with the Huntley and Palmers factory. I've just been looking at some aerial pictures of it on Britain from Above and it should be interesting.

 

[RJS1977]

They would have known that the runners-up hadn't scored as many points as the teams from the previous heats.

 

Whether a layout is retained or scrapped will depend on a number of factors - the most important of course being on whether anyone has anywhere to put it.

 

However it used to be quite common (maybe still is) for clubs and individuals to build a layout as a 'quickie' to fill in a gap at a show and scrap it afterwards, so in that respect building a layout for GMRC and scrapping it afterwards is nothing new....

[hicksan]

I disagreed with the judges on this one. I can see why the WCR team won but I would have given it to the Three Millers. I thought the submerged track was spectacular and that the scenics and build quality in general were superb - all very crisp detail and no bald patches or visible rough edges. Yes the layout could have been a bit more ambitious but they were sticking to a prototype and I respect that. The corrugation machine compared to stay-alive capacitors? No contest! Personally I found the WCR layout to be a bit too full of gimmicks and too much of a toy train set, by comparison. Nice detail in places but their build quality honestly was not as good as that of the Three Millers, trackwork and electronics notwithstanding. Nothing against gimmicks and animations in general but I don't like the thought of serious modellers being penalised for being just that and focussing on quality and prototype.

 

I enjoyed this episode but was left feeling a bit uncomfortable at the end, for the first time with this series. The result is becoming too formulaic, I feel. The criteria for a winning layout are too predictable. Quality trackwork, lots of trains running simultaneously and reliably, as wacky theme interpretation as possible with doses of humour, a single spectacular over-the-top animation, dense scenic detail packed in as much as possible, large dose of fantasy storyline,... Too much of this, after a while, will tend to close things down rather than open up new horizons for the hobby.

 

Steve's comment about the ski jump was priceless. I would have liked to see a train try to go up that, rather than down.

 

That said: the inclusivity of this series - in terms of the diversity of people in front of the camera, who might normally be overlooked by popular television - is wonderful and inspiring, and not just this episode either. I was very moved hearing Andy from the Thunderbolts talk of his determination to overcome people's prejudice in underestimating him. That was a good moment. And the model ship was lovely.

[Pacific231G]

5 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

They would have known that the runners-up hadn't scored as many points as the teams from the previous heats.

 

However it used to be quite common (maybe still is) for clubs and individuals to build a layout as a 'quickie' to fill in a gap at a show and scrap it afterwards, so in that respect building a layout for GMRC and scrapping it afterwards is nothing new....

When they recorded a heat they might have known that a previously recorded runner up had already scored more highly but they couldn't say that at the time because they wouldn't know whether it would be transmitted before or after that. For reasons we've already been over, the producers are not bound to transmit the heats in the same order that they were recorded in and we already know from various team members that they aren't doing that and didn't last year either. 

 

I take your point about "quickie" layouts*  but surely a lot more has been invested in each of these layouts than would be the case for an exhibtion quickie. The actual three day build seems to be the cumination of a lot of pre competition work. 

 

*I've recently re-read a couple of his articles and  Alan Wright's original Inglenook Sidings was built in the evenings of a couple of weeks to fill a gap at the Manchester show. Definitely a quickie but it went on to be exhibited and win prizes at many exhibtions for years after.

[Pete the Elaner]

12 hours ago, davefrk said:

Would I be at risk of being called a 'rivet counter' if I asked why the smoke was coming out of the 'lighting up' chimney instead of the side chimney on the Crosti 9F?

 

Dave.

I also wondered if I was being pedantic by noticing this? I model with Scale7 a little, which prompts some friends to (jokingly?) call me a rivet counter, so maybe we both are 

But who would be so stupid to buy a loco with 2 chimneys & not ask why before adding a smoke unit to the wrong one? It would be a bit like adding an exhaust port & smoke to a class 87.

 

I liked the TT modellers' entry this week because it is one of the few I've seen on the show which is not covered with gimmicks & actually looks like a proper model.

When I first saw them, I wondered if we would see a TT layout on the show, but since we didn't, I guess the rules state that the projects must be in OO gauge?

[RJS1977]

14 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

I also wondered if I was being pedantic by noticing this? I model with Scale7 a little, which prompts some friends to (jokingly?) call me a rivet counter, so maybe we both are 

But who would be so stupid to buy a loco with 2 chimneys & not ask why before adding a smoke unit to the wrong one? It would be a bit like adding an exhaust port & smoke to a class 87.

 

I liked the TT modellers' entry this week because it is one of the few I've seen on the show which is not covered with gimmicks & actually looks like a proper model.

When I first saw them, I wondered if we would see a TT layout on the show, but since we didn't, I guess the rules state that the projects must be in OO gauge?

 

There is certainly a rule that the layout must use 16.5mm track to allow the camera wagon to be used (although we haven't seen much of that this series).

 

However they could have used TT for perspective modelling had they wished.

 

[298]

41 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

But who would be so stupid to buy a loco with 2 chimneys & not ask why before adding a smoke unit to the wrong one? It would be a bit like adding an exhaust port & smoke to a class 87.

 

Sorted....

 

 

[whart57]

24 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

However they could have used TT for perspective modelling had they wished.

 

 

We did. Apart from the lineside cottage with the flags which was HO scale to match the stock, all the buildings were made to 3mm scale.

[whart57]

On behalf of the 3 Millers can I thank people for the positive comments.

 

I agree our operation was a bit basic, but that wasn't the intention. We had planned a more extensive demo but electrical issues (which we managed to keep quiet from the producers ;-) ) and time - the flooding of the polder was not as fast as you might think from watching TV - meant we had to keep it simple.

 

I agree with the assessments made here that the best team won, but I think we gave them a good scare at times. WCR did stick to the format required a lot better than we did, in fact we probably did ourselves no favours regarding points on the board by being a bit pedantic and "purist" - as Steve Flint might say. In fact on the last morning Steve asked me if we were worried about our reputations. Well no, Steve, if we were worried about our reputations as finescale modellers we wouldn't have been within a hundred miles of Fawley Hill. Our red lines though were that the layout had to be consistent in terms of stock, scenery and historical context and that individual items were to be made to a high standard. Obviously tambourines and shuttlecocks presented a problem there.

 

What we hoped to show though is that it is possible to be serious railway modellers and still enjoy taking part in something like the Challenge. We just wish we'd still had the energy we had twenty years ago. And we hoped to show that it's possible to build a "proper" layout and still make something fit for TV. I think we achieved those aims.

[MarkSG]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

When I first saw them, I wondered if we would see a TT layout on the show, but since we didn't, I guess the rules state that the projects must be in OO gauge?

 

Given that it seemed to be an authentic Dutch loco, I presume it was actually HO gauge. So not quite 3 Millers, but more 3 (point 5) Millers!

[whart57]

2 hours ago, hicksan said:

 The corrugation machine compared to stay-alive capacitors? No contest!

 

I wrote about the vac forming machine in my blog on here:

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blogs/entry/20339-encouraging-my-little-entrepreneurs-or-a-saga-of-a-vacuum-cleaner-and-a-hot-air-gun/

 

[chuffinghell]

15 hours ago, russ p said:

.......We don't normally build special effects into layouts.......

I thought the smoke effect in my pump house was quite special 

 

 

[chuffinghell]

I’m not against the animations, some are quite clever and others are a great bit of fun

 

It just seems that the animations take precedent over the actual model railway element

Edited October 5, 2019 by chuffinghell

[Neil]

3 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

......Many other teams, not just heat winners, have exhibited their GMRC layouts so I'm curious that your team  decided to dismantle immediately after the heat. ....

 

If our experience (Cambrian Coasters) was anything to go by then team members may well have had items earmarked for recycling even at the planning stage. Five of us chose locos wle wanted for our home layouts and the other has the now stripped basebords ready for an 0 gauge essay. To help motivate me the buildings I put together for one of our ready made features were designed to have an after life on my York based layout. While this might seem a bit cynical to some it has ensured very little waste, which  has to be a good thing. As an exhibition layout a ten by five solid mass, even though it can be split into three is going to be an awkward prospect to transport without a van. Two of us already have a selection of bespoke exhibition layouts easier to move and more fun to operate. The format the competition funnels you into isn't the best for ensuring layout longevity.

[LNER4479]

3 hours ago, whart57 said:

What we hoped to show though is that it is possible to be serious railway modellers and still enjoy taking part in something like the Challenge ... And we hoped to show that it's possible to build a "proper" layout and still make something fit for TV. I think we achieved those aims.

Well said that man! EXACTLY the ethos behind Team Grantham's involvement in this year's competition. Judge for yourself tonight how well we did in that context...

[noiseboy72]

1 minute ago, LNER4479 said:

Well said that man! EXACTLY the ethos behind Team Grantham's involvement in this year's competition. Judge for yourself tonight how well we did in that context...

Here here!

As modellers, we don't take ourselves too seriously, but we wanted our model to be something that a child and parent could aspire to build, was operationally interesting, visually appealing and with functional, relevant animations. Did we succeed? Tonight will tell!!

 

[Ian Morgan]

We Basingstoke Bodgers have kept our Santa layout from the heat, and it has been to a few exhibitions, and will be at our own one next March. The layout for the final, because it had to link up with the other layouts, would not be usable on its own, plus we did not have storage space for two layouts, so it has been split to form a couple of static diaramas and a smaller N gauge layout around the Royal Albert Bridge.

 

The Aberdeen club did convert their winning layout into a roundy-roundy by adding an oval fiddle yard, though.

 

The Steam Punk layout from our heat was binned andonly the rolling stock salvaged, due to lack of storage space, but I know a number of the series 1 layouts did survive.

 

As a separate note - had the 3 Milliers not been so dismissive of the scratch build challenge, that extra 2 points would have seen them win the heat.

 

 

[PhilJ W]

4 hours ago, chuffinghell said:

I’m not against the animations, some quite clever and and a bit of fun

 

It just seems that the animations take precedent over the actual model railway element

As has been said before the target audience is not railway modellers. 

[chuffinghell]

8 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

As has been said before the target audience is not railway modellers. 

 

Fair enough

[andyram]

8 hours ago, hicksan said:

I disagreed with the judges on this one. I can see why the WCR team won but I would have given it to the Three Millers. I thought the submerged track was spectacular and that the scenics and build quality in general were superb - all very crisp detail and no bald patches or visible rough edges. Yes the layout could have been a bit more ambitious but they were sticking to a prototype and I respect that. The corrugation machine compared to stay-alive capacitors? No contest! Personally I found the WCR layout to be a bit too full of gimmicks and too much of a toy train set, by comparison. Nice detail in places but their build quality honestly was not as good as that of the Three Millers, trackwork and electronics notwithstanding. Nothing against gimmicks and animations in general but I don't like the thought of serious modellers being penalised for being just that and focussing on quality and prototype.

 

I enjoyed this episode but was left feeling a bit uncomfortable at the end, for the first time with this series. The result is becoming too formulaic, I feel. The criteria for a winning layout are too predictable. Quality trackwork, lots of trains running simultaneously and reliably, as wacky theme interpretation as possible with doses of humour, a single spectacular over-the-top animation, dense scenic detail packed in as much as possible, large dose of fantasy storyline,... Too much of this, after a while, will tend to close things down rather than open up new horizons for the hobby.

 

Steve's comment about the ski jump was priceless. I would have liked to see a train try to go up that, rather than down.

 

That said: the inclusivity of this series - in terms of the diversity of people in front of the camera, who might normally be overlooked by popular television - is wonderful and inspiring, and not just this episode either. I was very moved hearing Andy from the Thunderbolts talk of his determination to overcome people's prejudice in underestimating him. That was a good moment. And the model ship was lovely.

The person you were referring to was Kevin.

 

10 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

In which case, you must have missed the final scores chart, which was only on screen for a few brief seconds (as it has been for all episodes):

 

Heat 4                                                                Provisional                                                                              Final

WCR            8              0              6                              14                     8              0              6              8              22

3 MIllers     7              0              7                              14                     7              0              7              7              21

Titfield        7              2              4                              13                     8              2              4              5              19

 

As you can probably tell, I've been keeping a close watch as I was genuinely interested in how the scoring was worked. You can see that there was one adjustment from provisional to final and in other episodes some of the scores have been adjusted more than this.

 

I did see the final score chart you referred to, hence my comment. At the end of the final day we were told by the director that it had been the closest heat and we had missed out by a point hence why I mentioned the difference with the scores shown on screen. We were also told that a team from an earlier heat had accumulated a higher score. At the end of the day it makes no difference we were beaten by a better team and I wish them well. They were a good bunch of lads.. 

[Captain Kernow]

As with all previous episodes, I did enjoy it but my wife and I would have chosen the 3 Millers layout to win, in terms of 'traditional' model railway layouts, it had the most integrity and consistency, in my view, at least.

 

We do understand why the WCR layout won, though.

 

However, I'm beginning to find less and less credibility in the Scratchbuild Challenge. I do understand the raison-d'etre behind it and how it challenges one's ingenuity and inventiveness, but I think it's being done the wrong way round. I'd now prefer to see the judges say 'build us a whatever', whatever that might be, and let the individuals choose the materials they need to make the best quality model of a whatever that they can in the time.

 

Perhaps a range of materials, both traditional (eg. plasticard, card and wood) can be provided, together with some less usual stuff, such as kitchen utensils, items of clothing or garden furniture.

 

The skill would be in producing the best quality model. The way that this would reflect 'real life modelling' is that if I wanted to build (say) a model of a detached house, I would choose the most appropriate materials I could obtain, in order to build the best quality model I could manage. I wouldn't limit myself to (say) a sink plunger, a wooden clothes peg and a harmonium.

 

The formula of having sufficient animations to impress the judges seems to have been taken up by all teams, but sometimes at the expense of good, solid basics, such as well-laid track, robust electrics and reliable or suitable rolling stock. That's ultimately neither here nor there, provided everyone has some fun and the show continues to attract good audiences and promotes the hobby.

 

I do wonder, though, if it should perhaps be called the GMR&AC.

 

Edited October 5, 2019 by Captain Kernow

[Stubby47]

If non-modellers now visit a model railway exhibition, will they be expecting animations on all layouts?

[andyram]

10 hours ago, whart57 said:

On behalf of the 3 Millers can I thank people for the positive comments.

 

I agree our operation was a bit basic, but that wasn't the intention. We had planned a more extensive demo but electrical issues (which we managed to keep quiet from the producers ;-) ) and time - the flooding of the polder was not as fast as you might think from watching TV - meant we had to keep it simple.

 

I agree with the assessments made here that the best team won, but I think we gave them a good scare at times. WCR did stick to the format required a lot better than we did, in fact we probably did ourselves no favours regarding points on the board by being a bit pedantic and "purist" - as Steve Flint might say. In fact on the last morning Steve asked me if we were worried about our reputations. Well no, Steve, if we were worried about our reputations as finescale modellers we wouldn't have been within a hundred miles of Fawley Hill. Our red lines though were that the layout had to be consistent in terms of stock, scenery and historical context and that individual items were to be made to a high standard. Obviously tambourines and shuttlecocks presented a problem there.

 

What we hoped to show though is that it is possible to be serious railway modellers and still enjoy taking part in something like the Challenge. We just wish we'd still had the energy we had twenty years ago. And we hoped to show that it's possible to build a "proper" layout and still make something fit for TV. I think we achieved those aims.

Having seen your layout first hand I thought you produced a lovely model with a very different and brave approach. It ticked the boxes for your approach and were close in the end. It was great to meet you all.