GMRC Series 2 - Episode 8 - The Final - 'Surprise Surprise' - 5.40pm

[hicksan]

17 hours ago, CharlieJohnson said:

 

Yeah the class 24 was the prototype that we asked to be fitted with DCC so we could run it and then we went and ran it through fire. 

 

Plus you might have noticed Bachmanns Crane too. 

 

Very interesting. If the manufacturers have twigged that the GMRC is a good opportunity to showcase new products, pre-release, then that is a VERY good sign for the impact the show is having on sales, and the hobby in general AND a good indicator on the future of the show. Hornby's new TV ad is another such indicator. Well done to all the teams for making this possible.

[hicksan]

2 hours ago, noiseboy72 said:

Things can change even after the edit is finalized. In the programme introduction Kathy is shown discussing an infraction of the rules, but whichever episode this was from appears to have been re-edited and that scene removed.

That clip may have been left over from a certain episode in Series 1. KBG are not above taking choice clips completely out of context.

[sjp23480]

Really enjoyed the whole series and not much to add to the dialogue.

 

I had one question.  I thought the Team Grantham heat layout depicting the flooding in the low countries in the 1950s/60s was brilliant.  But I didn't see it in the final?  I thought all three layouts had to be joined up?  Was it edited out?

 

Steve

[phil-b259]

1 minute ago, sjp23480 said:

Really enjoyed the whole series and not much to add to the dialogue.

 

I had one question.  I thought the Team Grantham heat layout depicting the flooding in the low countries in the 1950s/60s was brilliant.  But I didn't see it in the final?  I thought all three layouts had to be joined up?  Was it edited out?

 

Steve

 

Wrong team Steve!

 

The three layouts by team Grantham were:-

 

An Alpine themed one in the heats

The King Arthur themed one in the Semi

The Fairground themed one in the final

 

 

The Dutch themed layout was by a team called "The Three Millers" in heat 4 - but that team lost out to "Who's Counting Rivets"

 

 

 

[Paul_in_Ricky]

12 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Whinge alert! My only real gripe with KBG was that they altered the rules for the final at the 11th hour and 59 minute.......we would require to stop building at 5pm on the third day. They'd been thinking....... that they needed all of the fourth day for that. ...... our 32 hour plan for our zany layout was impossible enough as it was but to then have 5 hours taken off us

That's pretty outrageous. Messing around teams that have carefully planned their schedule and then cutting time just shouldn't be done.

A pretty incompetent production team to make a mistake like that. Also hugely poor not to explain why the teams might not have managed to achieve what they'd planned because of the production team's mistake in planning too.

 

Whilst drama and jeopardy might make good television, a great end result to show on screen is just as important.

[sjp23480]

1 minute ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Wrong team Steve!

 

The three layouts by team Grantham were:-

 

An Alpine themed one in the heats

The King Arthur themed one in the Semi

The Fairground themed one in the final

 

 

The Dutch themed layout was by a team called "The Three Millers" in heat 4 - but that team lost out to "Who's Counting Rivets"

 

 

 

I stand corrected, thanks Phil - was very confused for a while - my synaptic pruning seems to be accelerating with age!

[Ballanparkway]

We really enjoyed ourselves working on this show. Yes it was hard work and tiring. Also as you probably see from the final it was REALLY hot in there during the early Summer when it was filmed.  I met such a contribution of talented modellers from all teams taking part in this years GMRC. Never expected to get to the final and just missing out by one point. If anyone is thinking of taking part if there is a series 3 next year DO! Best advice I can give is play to your strengths and what you can do quickly and with quality. I concentrated mainly on the scenics building rock faces, static grassing Techniques and building the odd kit as well as throwing some humour into the layout. Yes I can do electronic and electrical work. But Gwion & Steve we’re far more advanced in this area especially the animations! Charlie was top notch talent  on the scratch building. An area I have only ventured into in a minor way on my home layout “ Ballan Parkway”.  Alex has great carpentry skills as well as being an expert on building 3D modelling locos which wasn’t featured unfortunately. The other Richard ( Richard De la Camp) is excellent at weathering. We all chipped into the finishing off scenic work on completion of the layouts.  You really do have to work as a team though.

[phil-b259]

9 minutes ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

That's pretty outrageous. Messing around teams that have carefully planned their schedule and then cutting time just shouldn't be done.

A pretty incompetent production team to make a mistake like that. Also hugely poor not to explain why the teams might not have managed to achieve what they'd planned because of the production team's mistake in planning too.

 

Whilst drama and jeopardy might make good television, a great end result to show on screen is just as important.

 

Its not an unusual thing in the TV world for deadlines to change if needs be - the production company will only have hired the camera crew and kit for a specified number of days and extending this would have either been very expensive or logistically impossible.

 

Please remember that, as with real UK railways, TV companies do NOT OWN the people who make the programmes. The TV company will commission a programme from an independent production company, who will in turn buy in the technical expertise and kit from a myriad of 3rd parties to make it happen. As with all such setups each party needs to make full use to their assets / skills so they can earn a living and not leave days free 'just case' the production company got it wrong.

 

The TV / film production industry is dominated by freelancers, thus most of the technical people involved in the action at Fawley had been contracted in to work for XX days on this show and would be moving on to other things (not necessarily with the same production company) as soon as it finished.

 

 

Edited October 27, 2019 by phil-b259

[noiseboy72]

We exhibited our layouts at a local open day yesterday. It all went pretty well and we got to understand how to present the layouts and what guests like to see.

 

We've got a few bits to finish off, but operationally both layouts behaved themselves. 

 

We have a couple of dates in the diary for next year but would welcome invitations to other shows. Please just have a look at our website 

[Paul_in_Ricky]

22 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Its not an unusual thing in the TV world for deadlines to change if needs be 

 

 

It's not simply changing deadlines, it's changing the rules of the game half way through. It's simply not fair.
Imagine the furore if it got out that in The Great British bake off half way through a four hour technical challenge the contestants were told they only had an hour left and that left half baked products around.

If the production team realised they hadn't enough time to shoot what they wanted, they should have re-evaluated their plans, not screwed up the contestants plans that compromised their final results.


Yes, I know a fair bit about TV production having working as a cameraman for over forty years. This is an example of the production company getting it wrong from what we've been told.

[t-b-g]

If I had drawn out a plan that involved large amounts of assembly off the layout and then fitting to the layout and testing right at the end and then had that opportunity taken away, I would be more than a little miffed!

 

I think it is to the great credit of the teams that they have taken it so well.

 

I only saw a small amount of this series as I am usually busy on Friday evenings and never get chance to catch up on viewing things, so I either watch them when they are on or don't bother. So I saw the editions shown on Saturdays. I enjoyed the semi final. Not modelling as I would do it but a good bunch of people with some clever ideas and the skill to put them into action. I thought the final seemed a bit disjointed as if continuity and editing had been sacrificed to cram the final into the time allowed for it. In effect, they were trying to fit 12 layouts into a show that had previously been devoted to 3. So the format for the final with incorporating the previous layouts just didn't seem to flow and the teams would have had little opportunity to sort out any faults on the first two layouts. I would much rather have had the teams have more building time on the final layout than spend time linking the three together.

 

Still, it was all good fun and if it attracts a few newcomers to the hobby, I am all in favour. 

[phil-b259]

48 minutes ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

It's not simply changing deadlines, it's changing the rules of the game half way through. It's simply not fair.
Imagine the furore if it got out that in The Great British bake off half way through a four hour technical challenge the contestants were told they only had an hour left and that left half baked products around.

If the production team realised they hadn't enough time to shoot what they wanted, they should have re-evaluated their plans, not screwed up the contestants plans that compromised their final results.


Yes, I know a fair bit about TV production having working as a cameraman for over forty years. This is an example of the production company getting it wrong from what we've been told.

 

Not a particularly good comparison because the teams on the GMRC were advised BEFORE work started. Yes it might well be on the morning of Day 1 - but the change still happened BEFORE the actually competition started. To use your bake off analogy its the same as contestants being told just before they start baking that they will have 2 hours less - not mid-way through the bake.

 

Its all very well complaining on here - but faced with the gargantuan task of extending the contracts / hire agreements, booking extra accommodation at short notice etc is it any wonder the production company reduced the build time instead when the practicalities of shooting the final emerged.

 

Of course such a change will impact the finished product - nobody is suggesting it won't - BUT he reduction of time was the same for all 4 teams and as such in strict competition terms was fair. Yes it adversely impacted team Grantham, who were a man down anyway,  but equally you could also say that going for an ambitious layout that will be a challenge to build within a deadline is their choice in the first place and something a bit less ambitious would have been a wise idea anyway - if you hark back to the heats you will remember that the Rail Riders team lost a team member for a good few hours after they drilled through their finger and if you really were that picky about 'fairness' then you would be demanding all the other teams had to forfeit a team member for the same length of time to keep it 'fair'.  Yes that might have been an accident - but it still had an impact on the teams building ability for a few hours didn't it. Similarly perhaps all the other 3 teams in the final should have had a team member sent home so as to make things 'fair' to Team Grantham

 

 

What we also don't know from the broadcast is whether the judges made any allowance for the shortened construction timeframe - companies don't wash their dirty linen in public do they so its not as if the finished programme is going to mention such a course of action. We already know that there is an awful lot which doesn't get shown and I'm sure Kathy + Steve are far more attentive to TV induced problems than might appear from what gets broadcast.

 

 

[CharlieJohnson]

The goal posts were moved so many times during the final. All teams suffered at least 1 issue with functionality. On our layout it was our coal Hoist as we had said that was going to be working along with my workshop and the glowing core. We never mentioned that we would have the crane working yet James pointed it out.

 

We were also told that the layouts would be filmed all though as one take then during our demonstration as we went first we had to stop and keep going back over again and again. 

 

Due to a really bad accident with out Jurassic Park layout when moving it into storage after out semi final we weren't able to fully run the track as we had wanted but we're able to have all our animations working. 

 

On our final layout so many details were missed out from our doppelgängers all over the layout to our 99 red hotair balloon atop the mountain. We also had more animations that weren't shown at all which wasn't helpful. 

 

In the end we gave it our all and it came down to our first layouts that decided the winner of the show. 

[RJS1977]

Sorry to hear TG were a man down all through the competition - I'm just a few miles down the road/up the river from Fawley Hill and would have loved to take part (my solo application was rejected).

[RJS1977]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

Question: Jame says the 3D printed figures were 7mm scale, but on the boards they seem to match the 4mm ones. Does he just not know what he's talking about? 

 

I understood that James was talking about the height of the figures, not the scale, as 7mm equates to 5'9" in 00. (Though I'm sure Tim is much taller than that!).

[phil-b259]

35 minutes ago, CharlieJohnson said:

 

Due to a really bad accident with out Jurassic Park layout when moving it into storage after out semi final we weren't able to fully run the track as we had wanted but we're able to have all our animations working. 

 

 

Kathy has a picture of the damage on her website.

Edited October 27, 2019 by phil-b259

[Paul_in_Ricky]

29 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Not a particularly good comparison because the teams on the GMRC were advised BEFORE work started.

If you'd spent days planning how you were going to approach a task and then had the timescale changed effectively on-site you'd be justified in feeling there was some unfairness in that process.

Quote

 faced with the gargantuan task of extending the contracts / hire agreements, booking extra accommodation at short notice etc is it any wonder the production company reduced the build time instead when the practicalities of shooting the final emerged.

They would have known that well in advance. It's just poor planning on the production's part.

Quote

you could also say that going for an ambitious layout that will be a challenge to build within a deadline is their choice in the first place and something a bit less ambitious would have been a wise idea anyway 

Hardly, it makes competitive sense to be as ambitious as you think you can be within the defined timescale.

Quote

 Rail Riders team lost a team member for a good few hours after they drilled through their finger and if you really were that picky about 'fairness' then you would be demanding all the other teams had to forfeit a team member for the same length of time to keep it 'fair'

Not the same at all. One of the team members made a mistake, literally a self inflicted injury. If that injury had been caused by a third party then your argument may have more validity.
 

[whart57]

40 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

I understood that James was talking about the height of the figures, not the scale, as 7mm equates to 5'9" in 00. (Though I'm sure Tim is much taller than that!).

 

Err 7mm equates to 1' 9" in OO. Even James is taller than that ......

[noiseboy72]

In both our heat and semi, we were short of members due to availability. In the heat neither Helen or Lucy were there on day 1 and Lucy was also absent on day 1 of the semi. Being 16, she was also limited to 8 hours on set, so wasn't there for the final golden hours each day.

 

It is a handicap, but a self imposed one!!

[RJS1977]

22 minutes ago, whart57 said:

 

Err 7mm equates to 1' 9" in OO. Even James is taller than that ......

 

I wondered who'd be the first to spot that...

[phil-b259]

1 minute ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

 

If you'd spent days planning how you were going to approach a task and then had the timescale changed effectively on-site you'd be justified in feeling there was some unfairness in that process.

 

 

I don't doubt ALL the teams felt it was 'unfair' to have the build time reduced just before starting work, but the bottom line is that they all were handicapped by it!  From what was broadcast its clear that this reduction in time most affected team Grantham - but had any of the other teams run into problems with their designs they would have been in trouble too.

 

5 minutes ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

 

They would have known that well in advance. It's just poor planning on the production's part.

 

 

So you have never had anything go wrong and need to make less than ideal compromises then?

 

I'm sorry but that sort of statement reeks of office bound management speak arrogance! On the real railway (and life in general) - it is frequently necessary to curtail jobs because it becomes evidant after starting there isn't the time to do everything which is asked and also meet the deadlines imposed by people / equipment / logistics.

 

Yes, the production company may well be guilty of poor planning - but that doesn't help the folks on the ground faced with not being able to get people to stay on an extra day, equipment which cannot be hired, hotels fully booked etc does it! If you have some sort of magic ability to make such problems disappear then there is a wealthy career available for you as an on site troubleshooter....

 

Moreover please pay attention to what I said about the judges - I'm sure the shortened build time was taken into account in their final scores (remember the bits with them chatting t he presenters in the station building are only PROVISIONAL scores that can change....)

 

 

10 minutes ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

 

Not the same at all. One of the team members made a mistake, literally a self inflicted injury. If that injury had been caused by a third party then your argument may have more validity.
 

 

 

So what if a team member went down with food poisoning from a hotel meal and had to miss a day then? would that count as 'self inflicted too'

 

The point is that if you want to be picky there were literally thousands of things you could claim were 'unfair' to the teams - both in the run up to, and during the builds.

 

You should not lose sight of the whole reason the GMRC exists in he first place - its to provide entertaining TV so people watch the adverts on Channel 5. It is NOT a competition like sporting fixtures where TV coverage came after the events had been up and running for decades and where the fact its being filmed is incidental to the action.  THAT is the primary goal of the production crew on site and everything else has to play second fiddle to the tune they call.

 

 

30 minutes ago, Paul_in_Ricky said:

Hardly, it makes competitive sense to be as ambitious as you think you can be within the defined timescale.

 

 

It does - but ambition in all cases has to be tempered by reality. It was clear from series 1 that the needs of the TV production crew would get in the way at times - and that there would bound to be stuff which would change at the last minute. Is that ideal? no of course its not, but the teams coped with it brilliantly.

[CharlieJohnson]

49 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Kathy has a picture of the damage on her website.

The damage was also done to the prelaid track underneath too. So without pulling the layout apart we weren't able to repair underneath but I was able to replace that bit of track. 

[Paul_in_Ricky]

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

I'm sorry but that sort of statement reeks of office bound management speak arrogance!

I've never spent a day working in an office.

As I've said I've spent forty years working on location and studio floors making TV, so I can sniff incompetence in a production team from a great distance. 

 

Quote

 not being able to get people to stay on an extra day,

Not sure where you're getting this idea of extra days from no one else has mentioned it.

The smart thing to do would have been to left the teams to finish within their promised time allowances and concentrated on working more efficiently on the last day. In a nut shell; don't over shoot.

[Phil Parker]

My summary went live at lunchtime: https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/reviews/the-great-model-railway-challenge-series-2-grand-final-suprise-su/

[PhilJ W]

The viewing figures will be interesting, any chance of a comparison with last years figures?