Jump to content
The forum software has been updated to a new version - further work on appearance and function will be carried out over the next day or so.

Hattons Dave

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

Recommended Posts

Why are all the posters on this missing the obvious, all r-t-r stock is just over 4ft gauge, not 4ft 8 1/2in. If people are prepared to accept that compromise then leave them to it. If people want to build an accurate brass kit of an LNWR coach to go with their re-gauged Bachmann Coal Tank then that is their choice. Running the same engine out of the box with a rake of generic 4 & 6 wheelers is not a crime.

The hobby is being promoted at the moment by a national channel TV series on which I am sure I saw a Coal Tank on Mars and a Sentinel diesel shunter on a Swiss mountain railway.

There is room for excellent scale modelling for people who have the skills, time and patience, and for people to build a layout and run what they want on it straight out of the box. Hornby O gauge used to make an 0-4-0 tank in every big 4 livery, and a detailed Princess Elizabeth. There is enough intolerence in this country now without taking it into the model railway community.

  • Like 9
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people seem to be upset that Hattons are going for a generic design rather than a specific prototype. As a theoretical exercise is there a prototype railway coach design out there that could do the job better than this generic one? I'll leave this for those more knowledgable than me, but I think we can rule out LNWR as being too distinctive.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Sorry to differ it is not about the purchase of such models it is about having the ability to start with a clean slate and produce a really good accurate model, after that who cares what colour you want it painted in!

 

Mark Saunders

 

An accurate model of which pattern/diagram?  And then what would be the "point" of delivering it in an unsuitable livery?  There'd just be ANOTHER wail of complaint.

 

In the end, the manufacturer wants to produce something that will sell and make a profit, and the way to do that with pre-grouping, at the present, is to produce something that will generally "look right" with the currently available pre-grouping locomotives in the currentlly available liveries.

 

Those who can produce (research, build and decorate) the stock they require to a similar performance and visual standard don't need to buy anything, they can jog along in the usual manner.  For those who don't have the skills and may not be able to devote the time to achieve them due to an interest in other aspects of railway modelling or have other pressures in life, then this new range is ideal.  And I'd venture to say that the second category is in the majority.

 

To be honest, I feel sorry for Hattons.  They announce something and amongst the welcomes and suggestions for improvement of what they're proposing (a lot of which are being taken on board), there is a welter of brickbats from precisionists for not producing an specifically accurate rake of carriages.

 

Oh well, can't please some of the people all of the time!

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought but if these coaches are modular in construction, would it be worth Hattons considering having it fit together in a way that others could make brass etch or 3D printed replacement sides or other such enhancements? Or at least have it go together in a way that does not make reverse engineering it more difficult than it has to be. So those wanting something more exactly representative of railway X could use the part of the generic coach as a base for something more faithful to a specific prototype. Much as seems to be done with the Ratio coaches, that way Hattons get a sale and the more skilled/picky modeller gets the coach he really really wants.

 

Would probably not be worth Hattons making the construction of the retail kits more difficult to allow this, but if something could be done two or three ways with equal facility, picking the most amenable to later disassembly and alteration might be worth while.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

I have held back on answering to this thread because I have a somewhat ambivalent view regarding my own modelling.

I have scratch built coaches and they are not 100% accurate.

I have kit built coaches and they too are not 100% accurate.

I have bought rtr coaches and some at least are not 100% accurate.

So where is the problem in buying a generic coach that looks reasonable but is not 100% accurate?  OK by their nature these will be rather less accurate than the examples given above but we are arguing degree not concept.

 

My own pre-grouping layout gives me the possibility to support stock from 8 pre-grouping companies.  A number of the Hattons coaches could well help fill gaps and will not look dramatically out of place.  Others that I could use are - to my eye at least - too far away from the company standards.  These I will not buy.  That others will be happy or delighted to buy such coaches does not bother me.  Why should it?  How does it impact on my modelling in any negative way?  Not at all.  So live and let live.  As I hope that those with higher standards than myself will allow me to live and let live with my choices.

 

If I live to be 100 then these Hattons purchases may well be replaced  with more accurate examples by one method or another.  However in a real world, rather than my skills improving over time and with experience, I find they are very slowly receding - rather poorer eyesight and poorer control of hands and fingers are a feature of aging for many.  So for a time at least some Hattons imperfect coaches will likely allow my layout to have a better and more realistic overall impression than if I had gaps in my stock where no gaps should exist.

 

Hectoring those who consider these as a good enough fit to their requirements will do nothing to persuade those people to improve their skills.  Allowing them to buy in peace but pointing out the shortfalls might however provide the impetus for them to do something about it in the future.

 

One problem I do see is the paucity of available coach kits for pre-grouping coaches.  Mallard, Blacksmith and (currently) Slater's coaches are only available via the second hand market often at silly prices, which is a situation that I will admit I have contributed to.  Others are only available from manufacturers who do not have an internet presence.  No criticism of them, that is their choice and they will have their reasons, just as I have my reasons for seriously considering generic coaches.  Other producers have withdrawn partially or completely from the market.  To pretend then that to model coaches from every corner of the pre-grouping world is just a case of buying a kit is very much an over-simplification.

It all depends on what you consider as accurate? My locos, carriages and wagons are all "layout models", hopefully looking  like a reasonable miniature representation of the real thing. So that means getting the dimensions and external details correct, but not unduly equipped with detailed interiors, flickering gas lighting, etc.

 

Those who want stock to run behind the well manufactured and presumably accurate RTR OO pre-group locos that have become available over the last few years but have little or no interest in building coaches will welcome Hattons generic models. I don't believe it will do much, if anything, to expand modelling or the pre-group period beyond what is available RTR.

 

You reference to paucity of pre-group coach kits is wide of the mark, for some railway companies at least. The Mallard/Blacksmith etches are still available through Coopercraft. It is the moulded wagon kits he can't produce but is able to buy in the etches and the castings etc. are probably available elsewhere (247?). LRM, Roxey, Stevenson Carriages, Worsley Works, Dart, Wizard, Prickly Pear, Peco and others produce kits for pre- group coaches.

 

So while Hatton's initiative will be welcomed by many who don't want to build, paint and line their own coaches, please don't imply that those who want to model pre-group with particular prototypes are short of opportunities.

 

 

12 hours ago, LBRJ said:

I hinted at the same thought much earlier in this eternal thread.

If its all made up, they cant tell you just how much they know its all wrong (or right) and that idea sits very uneasy in some minds.

model railways are, and should be, all about doing what you want to do...its toy trains FFS!!  -but some just have to tell you what is what,what is right and what is not.

If you model something fictitious, even if it purports to have some level of realism about it, then how can anyone tell what is right or wrong?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

It all depends on what you consider as accurate? My locos, carriages and wagons are all "layout models", hopefully looking  like a reasonable miniature representation of the real thing. So that means getting the dimensions and external details correct, but not unduly equipped with detailed interiors, flickering gas lighting, etc.

 

Those who want stock to run behind the well manufactured and presumably accurate RTR OO pre-group locos that have become available over the last few years but have little or no interest in building coaches will welcome Hattons generic models. I don't believe it will do much, if anything, to expand modelling or the pre-group period beyond what is available RTR.

 

You reference to paucity of pre-group coach kits is wide of the mark, for some railway companies at least. The Mallard/Blacksmith etches are still available through Coopercraft. It is the moulded wagon kits he can't produce but is able to buy in the etches and the castings etc. are probably available elsewhere (247?). LRM, Roxey, Stevenson Carriages, Worsley Works, Dart, Wizard, Prickly Pear, Peco and others produce kits for pre- group coaches.

 

So while Hatton's initiative will be welcomed by many who don't want to build, paint and line their own coaches, please don't imply that those who want to model pre-group with particular prototypes are short of opportunities.

 

 

If you model something fictitious, even if it purports to have some level of realism about it, then how can anyone tell what is right or wrong?

 

That is what  I said.

Though I would suggest that, for example, Iain Rice's various light railways had a air or realism about them, to say the least.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Nile said:

Some people seem to be upset that Hattons are going for a generic design rather than a specific prototype. As a theoretical exercise is there a prototype railway coach design out there that could do the job better than this generic one? I'll leave this for those more knowledgable than me, but I think we can rule out LNWR as being too distinctive.

 

16 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

An accurate model of which pattern/diagram?  And then what would be the "point" of delivering it in an unsuitable livery?  There'd just be ANOTHER wail of complaint.

 

In the end, the manufacturer wants to produce something that will sell and make a profit, and the way to do that with pre-grouping, at the present, is to produce something that will generally "look right" with the currently available pre-grouping locomotives in the currentlly available liveries.

 

Those who can produce (research, build and decorate) the stock they require to a similar performance and visual standard don't need to buy anything, they can jog along in the usual manner.  For those who don't have the skills and may not be able to devote the time to achieve them due to an interest in other aspects of railway modelling or have other pressures in life, then this new range is ideal.  And I'd venture to say that the second category is in the majority.

 

To be honest, I feel sorry for Hattons.  They announce something and amongst the welcomes and suggestions for improvement of what they're proposing (a lot of which are being taken on board), there is a welter of brickbats from precisionists for not producing an specifically accurate rake of carriages.

 

Oh well, can't please some of the people all of the time!

 

 

 

 

The question of which real coaches to choose has been posed several times here, and the anti-generic people seem unable to come up with an answer.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

That latest version looks just as if it might be based on an actual carriage design, without quite giving away which one!

 

Taking away the inconsistencies in the brake gear, compartment spacing and lighting really has made a big difference.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in two minds about the lateral position of the vacuum pipe. It tends to be easier to connect pipes between adjacent vehicles if they are mounted offset from the centreline. Or is this thinking too modern?  Whadjya reckon? (I've shown two alternatives.)

 

Also, now the buffers are a more respectable length, the vacuum pipe length might need to be a tad longer. (There may even be an RCH spec on such arcane connectivity.)

 

hattons-generic-12.png.fd640f2a5b5f32d4bd7a1dcea2edf6b8.png

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

I'm in two minds about the lateral position of the vacuum pipe. It tends to be easier to connect pipes between adjacent vehicles if they are mounted offset from the centreline. Or is this thinking too modern?  Whadjya reckon? (I've shown two alternatives.)

 

Also, now the buffers are a more respectable length, the vacuum pipe length might need to be a tad longer. (There may even be an RCH spec on such arcane connectivity.)

 

hattons-generic-12.png.fd640f2a5b5f32d4bd7a1dcea2edf6b8.png

 

 

The one to the left looks a lot more natural

 

BluebellBrake.jpg

 

https://spellerweb.net/rhindex/UKRH/SECR/LCDRcarriages.html

 

Richard

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at pictures of GWR non bogie coaches, the brake pipe appears to be vertical and to the left of the drawhook (often), to the right (occasionally) or no upstand at all and on the buffer beam itself (just close coupled vehicles ?)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hattons Dave said:

Morning all,

 

I've been reading through the feedback we've received and have made several more improvements, including:

 

  • Roof overlap
  • Full length footboards (on 6 wheelers)
  • Coach ends - vertical beading only
  • Brake pipe centered and handed on each end
  • 4w 5 compartment has had the compartments re-spaced
  • 6w brake has had the compartments re-spaced and duckets centralised
  • Full brake doors re-spaced
  • Rain strips added
  • Vac pans added (in lieu of air cylinder)
  • Emergency brake equipment added
  • Buffers changed to more realistic length and design
  • Drawbar hook plates added
  • J hangers added
  • Oil pots on roof moved to more prototypical positions

Gas and electric lighting will also be included on relevant liveries with associated gas tanks/battery boxes.

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

 

 

H4-4W-T1_v3-01.jpg.6e103bc417f61d35617c4551ad8e82e6.jpg

 

H4-6W-T3_v3-01.jpg.39bc56363d5f74894171be3b88808dd9.jpg

 

H4-6W-T4_v3-01.jpg.f3bb241ab93b3cdae59f426c29b415fe.jpg

Although I'm sure there were exceptions,  the vacuum pipe should always be offset to the left of the drawbar. This applied to locomotives as well as rolling stock as a quick search of photos will confirm.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So lots of people say "move the vac pipe", and Hattons move the vac pipe.

 

Then people start saying "move the vac pipe back again"...

 

Make your minds up! Perhaps we need to do a poll on this

  • Like 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The position of the vacuum pipe was laid down by the Railway Clearing House to ensure compatability across the network. It should be to the left of the drawbar as stated. As I said, rather than shoot the messenger , look at the millions of photos out there.

Edited by Denbridge
Spelling
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect a steampipe hanging down from the headstock might interfere with the coupling. Either put it in a detail pack or leave it off altogether. Anyone fitting scale couplings can also fit their own pipes.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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


×
×
  • 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.