Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, phil gollin said:

.

 

In a sense a full scale opinion poll is taking place at the moment.  Hattons have a range (9 odd liveries ?) of pre-grouping coaches up for pre-order, they will be getting orders in and these will either be spread all over the 9-odd, or concentrated into three or four.

 

I don't know, but Hattons will and it MAY help guide them.

 

.

 

I should think the only thing in the results of the pre-orders that might move Hattons away from the currently intended averagely generic style to a design shifted towards one company would be if the pre-orders were very heavily skewed towards one company. If for example the orders for LNWR and LMS were over 50% of the total, with the rest spread between the others, then LNWR pattern coaches would become a good idea with the lesser companies having their livery applied on the base of an LNWR style coach. If however the orders are more evenly spread across all liveries, then generic coaches that are reasonably OK for everyone but perhaps ideal for none are a sensible compromise.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Trog said:

 

I should think the only thing in the results of the pre-orders that might move Hattons away from the currently intended averagely generic style to a design shifted towards one company would be if the pre-orders were very heavily skewed towards one company. If for example the orders for LNWR and LMS were over 50% of the total, with the rest spread between the others, then LNWR pattern coaches would become a good idea with the lesser companies having their livery applied on the base of an LNWR style coach.

Or turning it on it's head, it could mean that LNWR/LMS modellers are less picky and more are willing buy a generic coach.

Edited by melmerby
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, melmerby said:

Or turning it on it's head, it could mean that LNWR/LMS modellers are less picky and more are willing buy a generic coach.

 

I seriously doubt that, at least for modellers of the LNWR. LMS modellers know that such ancient carriages would have been quickly set aside - the scrap and build policy didn't just apply to locomotives. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

Generic when it applies to drugs is a copy of a branded product rather than a cherry pick of parts to make the whole!

 

Mark Saunders

My New Oxford Dick & Harry says generic means 'characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things'. The Hatton's products will certainly be characteristic of the 4- and 6-wheel coaches of yore, and probably the more so for the - dare I say earnest? - efforts of Miss Prism, Edwardian, Compound and others. A propos drugs, Oxford says it means 'having no brand name; not protected by a registered trade mark'. Hatton's products will bear their brand name and be protected from copying. 

 

Ibid, Hatton's chosen designation of Genesis is defined as 'the origin or mode of formation of something', which perhaps implies that these models will display basic characteristics rather than finely detailed according to any real vehicles drawing. 

 

42 pages later, I find it intriguing that people who have declared the Hatton's products to be unworthy are still contributing to the thread. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

 

42 pages later, I find it intriguing that people who have declared the Hatton's products to be unworthy are still contributing to the thread. 

 

I for one have not said they are 'unworthy" whatever you imply by that. Simply that in my opinion it is not a good approach to make freelance models and modelling of the pre group era would be better served by the release of accurate models.

 

Why am i still contributing  here?

 

Because I want to , that is why.

 

Craig W

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

I share the view that these Generic pre-group 4 and 6 wheel carriages will meet a need for those that have bought a pre-group loco and want something to run behind it that is more typical of the era. For those like me that prefer to model a pre-group railway with reasonable accuracy (the LNWR in my case), these don't meet my needs. However, I recognise that Hattons have seen a profitable market opportunity but don't see this range of models doing anything to expand pre group modelling to any degree.

 

Why? Because the reason often quoted for people not having any pre-group coaches (or wagons for that matter) is because they don't want to build kits and couldn't paint the pre-group liveries if they did. So they aren't likely to start modelling the pre-group era unless other RTR models become available and, as this thread would appear to indicate, that isn't very likely as the market for specific, models based on prototypes of a particular railway isn't viable.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I seriously doubt that, at least for modellers of the LNWR. LMS modellers know that such ancient carriages would have been quickly set aside - the scrap and build policy didn't just apply to locomotives. 

Really? The LMS handed the new BR a pretty large fleet of geriatric locos so I would expect a similar proportion of similarly ancient rolling stock.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Really? The LMS handed the new BR a pretty large fleet of geriatric locos so I would expect a similar proportion of similarly ancient rolling stock.

I think the LNER pipped them to the post when it came to geriatric rolling stock.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Really? The LMS handed the new BR a pretty large fleet of geriatric locos so I would expect a similar proportion of similarly ancient rolling stock.

 

They made very quick work of making large swathes of pre-grouping locomotives and stock extinct very rapidly. LNWR locomotives were largely purged from the system in the '20s and '30s, as was much of the coaching stock. What survived, usually did so for a reason. The Johnson 2Fs for example only survived because nothing else was being built with low enough axle loadings or tight enough loading gauge clearances for use on lines such as the Halesowen branch or traversing Glenfield tunnel. Coaching stock wasn't so lucky, it was more readily replaced, throughout the LMS existence they churned out improvement after improvement and retired pre-grouping coaches rapidly.

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Zunnan said:

 

They made very quick work of making large swathes of pre-grouping locomotives and stock extinct very rapidly. LNWR locomotives were largely purged from the system in the '20s and '30s, as was much of the coaching stock. 

Yes, but was that just a manifestation of the oft bemoaned "Midland bias" of Group management? 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, PatB said:

Yes, but was that just a manifestation of the oft bemoaned "Midland bias" of Group management? 

 

You'd like to think so, given todays general opinion. But when you look at the withdrawal dates of most of the Midlands own locomotives, they fared little better. Most of the more wanting designs were weeded out in the same period, perhaps lingering more into the '40s in some instances but by and large they were gone by the early '50s much the same as the other constituent companies. The only real exception being the smaller shunting locomotives, 3F and 4F and a few isolated small tank locomotives (much the same as the LNWR Coal tanks). I think the 'Midland bias' opinion stems more from the fact that archaic and no longer suited to the growing traffic demand Midland designs were resurrected from the drawing board and built again under the LMS.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

My New Oxford Dick & Harry says generic means 'characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things'. The Hatton's products will certainly be characteristic of the 4- and 6-wheel coaches of yore, and probably the more so for the - dare I say earnest? - efforts of Miss Prism, Edwardian, Compound and others. A propos drugs, Oxford says it means 'having no brand name; not protected by a registered trade mark'. Hatton's products will bear their brand name and be protected from copying. 

 

"Generic" is one of those words which has different nuance and application according to context. In drugs, it means out-of-patent drugs that can be made by anyone (eg, aspirin, paracetamol), but more specifically it tends to be used for own-brand and cheap versions of them rather than expensive branded equivalents (eg, Tesco aspirin and Boots paracetamol, as opposed to Anadin and Neurofen).

 

From an intellectual property point of view, because these coaches have been designed by Hatton's, and aren't based on any single real life version, Hatton's will own the design right in them and hence they can't be copied by anyone else. Whereas if they'd made an exact replica of a real coach, they wouldn't be able to stop anyone else also making an exact replica of the same real coach, as in that case the design right vests in the original and will long since have expired (hence competing versions of Terriers, for example). So in this case the "generic" design is actually original, while in drugs the "generic" is not original. But that doesn't make them any less generic. It's just an interesting quirk of the way that language intersects with legislation.

 

(Not that I think any other manufacturer would want to copy the Hatton's design, anyway. If these are successful, and other manufacturers take note, I suspect they're more likely to come up with a similar, but subtly different, design, so that they not only compete in the market for first-time buyers but also offer an attractive add-on to people who've already got some but want their trains to look a bit less samey.)

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

I share the view that these Generic pre-group 4 and 6 wheel carriages will meet a need for those that have bought a pre-group loco and want something to run behind it that is more typical of the era. For those like me that prefer to model a pre-group railway with reasonable accuracy (the LNWR in my case), these don't meet my needs. However, I recognise that Hattons have seen a profitable market opportunity but don't see this range of models doing anything to expand pre group modelling to any degree.

 

Why? Because the reason often quoted for people not having any pre-group coaches (or wagons for that matter) is because they don't want to build kits and couldn't paint the pre-group liveries if they did. So they aren't likely to start modelling the pre-group era unless other RTR models become available and, as this thread would appear to indicate, that isn't very likely as the market for specific, models based on prototypes of a particular railway isn't viable.

Jol 

I think there is an intermediate category of people, who become interested in the pre-grouping era through one of the RTR pre-grouping locos. This leads them onto a slippery slope, which takes you to kit building and scratch building to get the exact buildings/locos/rolling stock that you discover that you want. Somewhere at the top of that slope is a point at which you start using things that are "close enough", just to get things running. How many Triang clerestories have been "cut and shut" to approximate to something else? I can see the Hattons coaches fitting into that sort of niche and, if it results in more modellers sliding further down the slope into the purist pre-grouping camp, that is a result. 

Fortunately, I don't have any photos of some of my earlier efforts...………...

Best wishes 

Eric 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, burgundy said:

This leads them onto a slippery slope, which takes you to kit building and scratch building to get the exact buildings/locos/rolling stock that you discover that you want.

 

I'm fairly resistant to slippery-slopeism so I'm pleased that Hattons are producing coaches that will be ok on MY layout!  :jester:

  • Like 4
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric,

 

I think that Hroth represents the great majority of those that will buy Hattons Generic models.

 

If more than a very few are motivated to take up kit building or RTR model "bashing" to create specific pre-group prototype models I would be very surprised. 

 

Jol

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since all 00 model locos sold by Hattons are more or less 4' gauge, I guess we might as well close our eyes to generic 4 wheel coaches behind them! Anyway, might encourage a bit of model bashing as in days of yore.
(NB if any newbies read this direct from watching the Great Model Railway Challenge, don't worry. All will become clear :unsure:)  

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

Of course if these sell well, in particular if certain liveries do very well, that might in turn stimulate the production of models based on a prototype...............

 

Particularly if the sales figures show a clear preference for some liveries over others. The ones that do sell the best will be an obvious contender to be accompanied by a more specific release.

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.