'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[wombatofludham]

Just now, Compound2632 said:

@wombatofludham, there is much sense in what you write but you do write as if you have inside information of Hattons' intentions. Is this the case?

 

No.

But we are often told it costs hundreds of thousands to tool up for a single loco, so a range of six wheel coaches will by definition cost similar if not more in terms of investment.  Pouring that level of money into a route-specific design would not be a sensible investment for a relatively small player because you would be putting all your money into a venture that would only satisfy one group of purists.  By devising a deign that incorporates the key features of late Victorian rigid chassis coaches, enough to satisfy those of us who rely on grainy photographs in books for research because these vehicles had largely gone when our grandparents were using the trains, you are cashing in on a larger market whilst only offending the high-end modellers who, if they have chosen that era, have already made a conscious decision to model a railway and rolling stock not available in ready to run, so are no worse off than before.

It's common sense.  There was so much variety in details in late Victorian rolling stock because of the plethora of companies that given to costs and returns in providing UK outline RTR, as described many times on here and elsewhere by those involved in commissioning, tooling up for one particular design would be folly unless one particular railway's market stood head and shoulders above all the others - and I am not convinced that is the case.  Pre-grouping GWR?  Pre-grouping GNR? MR? LNWR? GCR? Who do you chose if you are going to sink £250k-500k in money with the hope to get that back with a profit on top?  However there are sufficient common design features of typical late Victorian carriage designs to be able to synthesise a generic design that will, for many, look pretty close to those grainy photos or aqua-tints they rely on in published material to refer to.  This is in contrast to post grouping and post Nationalisation designs where a higher degree of standardisation of designs evolved, so it is more likely that a detailed line specific design will sell in sufficient numbers to give an economic payback - although even then we lack RTR examples of a variety of coach designs (LMS Period 2s, for example) because even with standardisation there was still a lot of variety and again it comes back to economic returns.

 

So no, no inside info, just common sense assumptions based on what has often been said by those in the business on this and other forums about the costs and market potential of UK RTR.

[stewartingram]

All this to-ing & fro-ing about these "generics"; but they've missed out on the most important one they could have in the range.

Where is the giraffe car? Triang managed to do one.

 

Stewart

[Andy Hayter]

1 hour ago, Robin Brasher said:

Hattons have changed tack by announcing six wheel full brakes and LBSCR coaches.

 

Not really Robin.

To change tack means to change direction (when sailing into the wind  - tacking - to change direction so that wind is from the port side to wind on the starboard side or vv)  and rather than change direction by introducing the full brake as a generic, it is an extension of the concept already put out.  Likewise adding the LBSCR coaches is expanding the range, not changing direction.

 

 

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, Hitchin Junction said:

I think the idea of taking a typical RTR model out of its box and displaying it on the mantelpiece as a "scale model"  is rather missing the point of what is scale modelling.

 

Tim

Maybe - but the purchaser is putting money into the hobby and gaining satisfaction from his display. Hard to see the harm in that. 

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, Robin Brasher said:

Hattons have changed tack by announcing six wheel full brakes and LBSCR coaches.

They have not announced LBSCR coaches. They have announced an additional livery, LBSCR, for their generic coaches. 

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, Hitchin Junction said:

I think the idea of taking a typical RTR model out of its box and displaying it on the mantelpiece as a "scale model"  is rather missing the point of what is scale modelling.

 

Tim

 

Yes and no.

 

While taking a RTR loco out of its box, adding the detailing parts then putting it in a display cabinet is not 'railway modelling' - said RTR item is still a scale model (even if it is mass produced and assembled by nimble Chinese hands).

 

Many people purchase expensive pictures to hang on their walls or items of sculpture despite having to artistic flair. Just because they are not artists themselves it doesn't mean said painting is not a 'work of art'

 

What about those why may well put their RTR locos on display when not in use because they like to look at them?

 

What about those who might use one layout to cover two time periods and thus have two fleets of locos - one set of which may be put on display while the other time period is in operation?

 

The hobby is called 'Model Railways' NOT 'model trains' or 'model locomotives' - and the last time I looked the 'railway' also had things like buildings, track, signalling, cuttings, bridges, etc which must be recreated in miniature. Are people who focus on these things not undertaking 'scale modelling' too?

 

 

[Robin Brasher]

The Hattons 'project genesis' coaches look more like pre-grouping coaches than the Hornby 4 wheel coaches so it is a step in the right direction.

 

There is an interesting article about the new coaches on page 6 of the free December Railway Magazine Guide to Modelling.

[Steamport Southport]

2 hours ago, Robin Brasher said:

The Hattons 'project genesis' coaches look more like pre-grouping coaches than the Hornby 4 wheel coaches so it is a step in the right direction.

 

There is an interesting article about the new coaches on page 6 of the free December Railway Magazine Guide to Modelling.

 

As pointed out on numerous occasions, the Hornby four wheeler is based on a real carriage. So by definition is vastly more authentic than these even though it's basically a forty year old toy. Just not a very detailed or accurate model. But it's still real.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/89335-Hornby-four-wheel-coach/&do=findComment&comment=1590202

 

 

 

Jason

[nswgr1855]

7 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

No it wouldn't. The accurate models would sell well to those who model that company, but few of us would want, say, LNWR coaches painted as LBSCR or Southern. People buy Tri-ang clerestories and butcher them to be more like their prototype. They do not often buy them and just repaint. 

 

Have you read all 60+ pages of this thread?

 

Well that is what Hattons is not quire offering, They seem to be based on a one company's styling, the rest are just repaints. The Triang clerestories have been offered in incorrect  colours for those happy with incorrect models.  

 

Terry Flynn.

 

[Compound2632]

13 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

As pointed out on numerous occasions, the Hornby four wheeler is based on a real carriage. So by definition is vastly more authentic than these even though it's basically a forty year old toy. Just not a very detailed or accurate model. But it's still real.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/89335-Hornby-four-wheel-coach/&do=findComment&comment=1590202

 

 

I believe there's a mis-identification in that posting. The photo in the magazine article is of a 4-wheel first No. 5 of c. 1878; this has the regular Midland-style panelling of most Highbridge-built carriages. The distinctive and peculiar feature of the Hornby carriage is the raised half-round beading - a feature that makes it easy for Hornby to apply lining - in this it draws its inspiration from an older 4-wheel 3-compartment first, photographed as No. 2A c. 1891. This carriage probably dated from the 1860s. Other photographs exist of another 3-compartment first, No. 1, and a 4-compartment third, No.6, with similar beading. No. 2 and No. 5 would appear to have been replaced by 30 ft  6-wheel firsts c. 1890 (No. 2 becoming 2A, lingering on in duplicate stock), these in turn were replaced by 46 ft bogie composites in 1809; No. 1 was replaced by a 46 ft bogie composite in 1905. There were other S&DJR carriages carrying the numbers 1 and 2 at various times; the whole question of S&DJR passenger carriages before c. 1890 is very clouded.

 

References:

R. Garner, The Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway Locomotive and Rolling Stock Registers, 1886 - 1930 (Somerset & Dorset Railway Trust, 2000)

C.G. Maggs, Highbridge in its Heyday (Oakwood Press, 1986)

[Mark Dickerson]

I'm still looking forward to these...

 

...but were Holly from Red Dwarf to appear with a fake moustache and an April Fool around now it would possibly be up for Jape of the Decade.

[Compound2632]

14 minutes ago, nswgr1855 said:

 

Well that is what Hattons is not quire offering, They seem to be based on a one company's styling, the rest are just repaints. 

 

 

Which, then, do you think, and what leads you to that conclusion? - Given the way the design has evolved from the first sketches published.

[Andy Reichert]

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Yes and no.

 

While taking a RTR loco out of its box, adding the detailing parts then putting it in a display cabinet is not 'railway modelling' - said RTR item is still a scale model (even if it is mass produced and assembled by nimble Chinese hands).

 

Many people purchase expensive pictures to hang on their walls or items of sculpture despite having to artistic flair. Just because they are not artists themselves it doesn't mean said painting is not a 'work of art'

 

What about those why may well put their RTR locos on display when not in use because they like to look at them?

 

What about those who might use one layout to cover two time periods and thus have two fleets of locos - one set of which may be put on display while the other time period is in operation?

 

The hobby is called 'Model Railways' NOT 'model trains' or 'model locomotives' - and the last time I looked the 'railway' also had things like buildings, track, signalling, cuttings, bridges, etc which must be recreated in miniature. Are people who focus on these things not undertaking 'scale modelling' too?

 

 

 

 

Only trying to point out a naming issue here, not suggesting either degree of model is better. But sticking with the naming, if the RTR LHS is a scale model, what do you call the partly updated RHS model ? (I'm aware of the remaining RHS shortcomings - I'm just using it as an example - It will eventually have the non scale coupler replaced and the truck side frames narrowed)

 

Andy

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by Andy Reichert
duplicated images

[Compound2632]

@Andy Reichert - a finescale model.

[Andy Reichert]

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

@Andy Reichert - a finescale model.

 

That word's not in the dictionary - mainly because no-one agrees on what it means. There are some (even here) who call standard RTR "finescale"., and everything in between that and the prototype scaled down exactly.

 

I'm asking because it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to describe what I do and what my hobby is. 

 

Andy

[Mark Saunders]

26 minutes ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

That word's not in the dictionary - mainly because no-one agrees on what it means. There are some (even here) who call standard RTR "finescale"., and everything in between that and the prototype scaled down exactly.

 

I'm asking because it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to describe what I do and what my hobby is. 

 

Andy

 

Rather like these terms, rather like Humpty Dumpty ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

 

Exhibition Standard

 

Professionally built

 

CAD drawing

[Compound2632]

I would consider the Wikipedia article Finescale standard defective, in that for 7 mm and 4 mm scales, it equates finescale with the wider gauges. I think finescale 00 is an established concept - wheel and track standards "finer" - i.e. a bit closer to scale - than off-the-shelf commercial RTR. But that's become a bit muddied given that most modern RTR features back-to-back and flange depth dimensions that, when the concept of finescale first surfaced, would have been thought finescale. One can even buy a RTR wagon with Alan Gibson wheelsets (or could if it hadn't sold out to pre-order).

[nswgr1855]

6 hours ago, Zunnan said:

 

No, it really would not. I wouldn't touch a GNR coach tarted up in GNR livery let alone in a fictitiously applied LNWR/MR/South Staffs/LMS absorbed 'unknown'. Likewise I wouldn't touch a Midland coach in LNWR livery or vice versa although in LMS livery I would in either case...but I certainly wouldn't foist an LMS constituent diagram on an LBSC or SECR modeller in their house colours. But as you clearly know better and have the friend in the appropriate R&D background with SDS, perhaps you would like to convince him that GNR coaches painted in Taff Vale livery would be a sure thing money spinner. Pre-grouping railways are much like football teams and their supporters, you love your own, tolerate some and wouldn't spit on the others if they were on fire.

 

Then I assume that you will not be buying any of the Hattons offerings, unless they are accurate representative of the prototype you model. I will not be buying any Hattons GNR repaints unless they look like a GNR coach. To look like a GNR coach they need the correct roof for starters. As for SDS models, they specialise in accurate finescale RTR  H0 scale Australian prototype models. The Australian market is a tenth of the UK market yet SDS makes enough money to continue developing new prototype specific finescale RTR models. 

 

Terry Flynn.

 

 

[wombatofludham]

2 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

I'm asking because it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to describe what I do and what my hobby is. 

 

Andy

Why do you need to describe it?

Do what gives you the most pleasure.  If you enjoy what you do, and are happy with your results that is all that matters.  Finescale, coarse scale, who cares.  You set your own standards and work to your own skill set and carry on regardless to satisfaction, hopefully. 

I don't know what it is with the model railway fraternity (and this isn't in any way a personal criticism, more a general rant) but I don't get this need to try and define what we do and categorise, compare against and in extreme cases belittle perceive "inferior" activities in what is a hobby.  If you want to build a working 4mm scale blast furnace and rolling mill to turn out your own rails, and grow miniature Bonsai trees to harvest for sleepers, fill your boots.  You are no better or worse than the individual who is happy with RTR and RTP and has a small oval tail chaser they share with the kids.  It's all about having fun and enjoyment, not a how far I can pee up the wall contest.

There again I always say I play with trains and challenge anyone to sneer back.  Even our finest scale kit built locos on Dolgellau are adult toys as I'm pretty sure no GWR built loco ever had an electric motor in the boiler and a microchip in the tender making chuffing noises to try and fool everyone it was a steam engine.

[Andy Reichert]

52 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

Why do you need to describe it?

Do what gives you the most pleasure.  If you enjoy what you do, and are happy with your results that is all that matters.  Finescale, coarse scale, who cares.  You set your own standards and work to your own skill set and carry on regardless to satisfaction, hopefully. 

I don't know what it is with the model railway fraternity (and this isn't in any way a personal criticism, more a general rant) but I don't get this need to try and define what we do and categorise, compare against and in extreme cases belittle perceive "inferior" activities in what is a hobby.  If you want to build a working 4mm scale blast furnace and rolling mill to turn out your own rails, and grow miniature Bonsai trees to harvest for sleepers, fill your boots.  You are no better or worse than the individual who is happy with RTR and RTP and has a small oval tail chaser they share with the kids.  It's all about having fun and enjoyment, not a how far I can pee up the wall contest.

There again I always say I play with trains and challenge anyone to sneer back.  Even our finest scale kit built locos on Dolgellau are adult toys as I'm pretty sure no GWR built loco ever had an electric motor in the boiler and a microchip in the tender making chuffing noises to try and fool everyone it was a steam engine.

 

Because I sell extra copies of what I make to similarly interested people.  They need to know what to expect for their money.

 

Andy

[Craigw]

2 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

There again I always say I play with trains and challenge anyone to sneer back.  Even our finest scale kit built locos on Dolgellau are adult toys as I'm pretty sure no GWR built loco ever had an electric motor in the boiler and a microchip in the tender making chuffing noises to try and fool everyone it was a steam engine.

 

I will stick to building models using skills I have developed. Maybe it is just an Australian thing but there is no way I am going to run around and shout out that I play with adult toys

 

Craig W

 

[SimonMW]

2 hours ago, Craigw said:

 

I will stick to building models using skills I have developed. Maybe it is just an Australian thing but there is no way I am going to run around and shout out that I play with adult toys

 

Craig W

 

 

And it is great that YOU do what YOU can do - that is what this hobby is supposed to be about.

 

BTW, Aussie here, capable modeller AND RTR buyer, even (shock horror) of items that are not necessarily faithful replicas of real things at real times... As to the (deliberately misunderstood?) comment about adult toys - heck, I'll happily tell people I play with adult toys, regardless of any interpretation people put on that :-D

 

I tell people I "play" with model trains quite often - and quite often get the 'so you play with toy trains' comment. The best answer is then the look on their face when I show them a video or photos of my layout.

 

This thread, and its 64 pages (so far) continue to remind me why this hobby struggles to attract new interest. It's funny, as a community "we" are so judgmental - both of each other, manufacturers, etc., particularly online on forums. I find at the shows I've been to, the clubs / associations I have been / am part of, that people in real life in this hobby tend to be more accepting of others and varied opinions.

 

To the subject at hand - as many have said - if this is what Hattons want to do, can make some money from it, can enhance people's enjoyment of THEIR model railways / collections / wall-mounted-and-stuffed displays... then good luck and I'm all for it, whether or not they could have done something 'better' easily, for no more cost, etc., etc. At the end of the day they are putting up their money. We have the choice to do the same. For me, good on them - I'll buy a couple.

[Dunsignalling]

7 hours ago, nswgr1855 said:

 

Then I assume that you will not be buying any of the Hattons offerings, unless they are accurate representative of the prototype you model. I will not be buying any Hattons GNR repaints unless they look like a GNR coach. To look like a GNR coach they need the correct roof for starters. As for SDS models, they specialise in accurate finescale RTR  H0 scale Australian prototype models. The Australian market is a tenth of the UK market yet SDS makes enough money to continue developing new prototype specific finescale RTR models. 

 

Terry Flynn.

 

 

And SDS cater for a specialised niche within that much smaller market. Hatton's is a mass-market retailer that is branching out into commissioning/manufacture and can be expected to make products to satisfy their established (broad) customer base. There is therefore no sensible parallel to be drawn; a more valid UK comparator might be Golden Age Models. In short, different courses, different horses.

 

Hatton's have made their intentions clear in that they will not (at least initially) offer multiple roof profiles. Thus, catering for your requirements (which I interpret to be ethnically-pure GNR carriages or nothing) would make them everything-but-generic and just as glaringly wrong for most other potential purchasers as the models so far described will be for you. 

 

These will be budget models aimed at people not currently committed to pre-group modelling who just want something to give a flavour of the era to go with colourful locomotives they have bought, to a greater or lesser degree, on a whim. The prices are set to make it possible to buy a 4-coach train for the sort of money that a specialist fine-scale manufacturer must inevitably charge for a single vehicle (comparison: the LNER dynamometer car produced by Rapido trains for Rails).

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[Hal Nail]

16 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

inviting the Barbarians of Genericism back into the fold,

Is this something to do with Brexit?

[Dunsignalling]

11 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

As pointed out on numerous occasions, the Hornby four wheeler is based on a real carriage. So by definition is vastly more authentic than these even though it's basically a forty year old toy. Just not a very detailed or accurate model. But it's still real.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/89335-Hornby-four-wheel-coach/&do=findComment&comment=1590202

 

 

 

Jason

Albeit shrunk-to-fit a wagon underframe that leaves a lot to be desired even when mounted under wagons.

 

John