birdseyecircus Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 The o gauge class 120 is reported to be scrapped according to a project status report on an O gauge Facebook group. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeraldH Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 (edited) Will the new Class 33s have the NEM pockets at the correct height and if so would spare pockets be available as spares to correct older models? Edited November 28, 2019 by GeraldH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul.Uni Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 23 minutes ago, birdseyecircus said: The o gauge class 120 is reported to be scrapped according to a project status report on an O gauge Facebook group. Paul It was confirmed as cancelled in Ben Jones (61661) post on the top of the last page. On 25/11/2019 at 15:37, 61661 said: Class 120 (rumour this has been cancelled) - NOT A RUMOUR. THIS HAS BEEN SHELVED FOR SOME TIME. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick-L Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 On 26/11/2019 at 18:42, 61661 said: OK. Here goes... Class 27s - due December Class 33 rerun - Jan/Feb Class 33 V3 with headlights - Q2 2020 Class 25 - delayed to make mods/improvements but hopefully end of Q2 2020 Class 45 - Q3 2020 Class 47 retool - Q4 2020 Class 86/0 - Q2 2020 Class 86/4 - first half of 2021 GWR Railcar - Q3 2020 Gresley O2s with GN tenders etc - Q4 2020 As with the O gauge list, all dates are provisional and subject to alteration. Hope this helps Ben First, thank you for taking the time to reply and provide your current outlook on these projects. Would you mind elaborating on what you thought needed fettling on the much-anticipated 25? Thanks again for your response - it's appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
43179 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 On 26/11/2019 at 18:15, 61661 said: Yes. We have made a number of changes based on feedback. Thanks to everyone who took the time to provide info and suggestions. Good Evening Ben , that's great news! - Is it possible to see what the revised CAD for the 56 looks like (Loadhaul for me please!) Regards Jon 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 Photos of EPs have gone up on facebook. The 33/0 in OO gauge with intensity lights now has finer radiator grills, and the horn covers are removed too. However we are still missing the pair of small panals just below each radiator grill on each side and there is still that incorrect panal on the roof between the exhaust port and cab. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Penguin 0f Doom Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 17 hours ago, Nick-L said: First, thank you for taking the time to reply and provide your current outlook on these projects. Would you mind elaborating on what you thought needed fettling on the much-anticipated 25? Thanks again for your response - it's appreciated. I would imagine it needs the front end "fettling" for a start to correct the overly flat front, that's its main issue. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
61661 Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 7 hours ago, The Penguin 0f Doom said: I would imagine it needs the front end "fettling" for a start to correct the overly flat front, that's its main issue. We have removed the rivet heads from around the tail lights and windscreen frames, which were far too prominent compared to the real thing and made a couple of internal changes to improve the lighting/electronics. With regard to the cab front, this appears to be a myth carried over from the first O gauge Class 25, which did indeed have a flat front. It was rectified on the second version with late body and the OO model has been scaled down from that. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Penguin 0f Doom Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 1 hour ago, 61661 said: We have removed the rivet heads from around the tail lights and windscreen frames, which were far too prominent compared to the real thing and made a couple of internal changes to improve the lighting/electronics. With regard to the cab front, this appears to be a myth carried over from the first O gauge Class 25, which did indeed have a flat front. It was rectified on the second version with late body and the OO model has been scaled down from that. Unfortunately, it is not a myth as regards the 7mm 25/3, it is still too flat. I concede it is more curved than the earlier body style, but the same error Heljan made with the earlier model is repeated in the 7mm 25/3 and I fear will be repeated in the 4mm 25/3 if the pictures I have seen so far are anything to go by. Having been over a number of the real loco's with a tape measure in order to produce an accurate model based on the Heljan 7mm loco, I can point out where Heljan have made their error, but having tried to make them aware of the issue in the past and being met with blank faces, it is my honest belief that they are not interested in rectifying the issue and achieving a much more accurate model. If you happen to know anyone at Heljan who is interested, please feel free to ask them to get in touch, my consultation fees are very reasonable..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D6775 Posted November 29, 2019 Share Posted November 29, 2019 On 28/11/2019 at 09:41, 61661 said: That's the plan, although we don't intend to offer the disc brake parts etc for the E&G push-pull Mk2s. The intention is to offer representations of the VB and AB underframe parts on a detailing sprue for customers to fit as required. Top man, wasn't so worried about the E & G stock more that the Vac coaches had Vac gear and the Air coaches had Air! Al. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold uk_pm Posted December 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 1, 2019 Any chance of offering the Mk 2 coaches with factory-fitted DCC lighting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
61661 Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 12 hours ago, uk_pm said: Any chance of offering the Mk 2 coaches with factory-fitted DCC lighting? We have a plan for interior lighting on the Mk2s. All will be revealed in due course. Ben Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaneofFife Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 given that most modellers always need more space I am staggered at the rate of how quickly O gauge has risen in popularity. are many planning short planks or running on generous clubbed together layouts?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold uk_pm Posted December 1, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 1, 2019 1 hour ago, 61661 said: We have a plan for interior lighting on the Mk2s. All will be revealed in due course. Ben Exciting news - and thanks for the quick reply. Great work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 14 hours ago, ThaneofFife said: given that most modellers always need more space I am staggered at the rate of how quickly O gauge has risen in popularity. are many planning short planks or running on generous clubbed together layouts?? It could be because you get 8 times more model for a little under 4 times more the price! Equally, as your eyesight goes with age, and the OO collection becomes too vast to master, perhaps there is some yearning for something bigger, easy to see and fewer items to handle. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltic17 Posted December 2, 2019 Share Posted December 2, 2019 15 hours ago, 61661 said: We have a plan for interior lighting on the Mk2s. All will be revealed in due course. Ben Sounds interesting - for extra realism if lighting is installed it would be great it if was the more subtle, more subdued lighting and not super bright LED type....if that could be done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Penguin 0f Doom Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 Considering Mr Jones has been back to this thread since my last post, with no response to me and I've not heard anything via PM, I can only assume Heljan aren't that bothered about rectifying the flat front of the 25..... The article in the January 2020 Railway Modeller highlights the errors and what is required to correct them for anyone else who is interested. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
37114 Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 On 01/12/2019 at 21:00, ThaneofFife said: given that most modellers always need more space I am staggered at the rate of how quickly O gauge has risen in popularity. are many planning short planks or running on generous clubbed together layouts?? Judging by the threads on here it seems to be the former. My plank is only 5ft 1 hour ago, The Penguin 0f Doom said: Considering Mr Jones has been back to this thread since my last post, with no response to me and I've not heard anything via PM, I can only assume Heljan aren't that bothered about rectifying the flat front of the 25..... The article in the January 2020 Railway Modeller highlights the errors and what is required to correct them for anyone else who is interested. I think the 25/2 has a more curved front, maybe the 25/1 will get sorted for a future run? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Penguin 0f Doom Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 2 hours ago, 37114 said: Judging by the threads on here it seems to be the former. My plank is only 5ft I think the 25/2 has a more curved front, maybe the 25/1 will get sorted for a future run? As I said above, I concede the later body style is more curved than the earlier body style, but it is still way too flat across the front. The error from the earlier model has been repeated in the more recent 7mm model and looking at the 4mm model, the error is there too. I have offered here to discuss the matter with anyone from Heljan, but nobody seems to be bothered. Ironically, its quite a simple fix and appears to be borne from one incorrect measurement. I could understand if I was just saying the model is wrong, but I can actually tell them where the fault is so they can rectify it, infact the RM article says where the error is and I have all the measurements should they want them. I'll bet I still hear nothing though.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted January 5, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 5, 2020 19 hours ago, The Penguin 0f Doom said: As I said above, I concede the later body style is more curved than the earlier body style, but it is still way too flat across the front. The error from the earlier model has been repeated in the more recent 7mm model and looking at the 4mm model, the error is there too. I have offered here to discuss the matter with anyone from Heljan, but nobody seems to be bothered. Ironically, its quite a simple fix and appears to be borne from one incorrect measurement. I could understand if I was just saying the model is wrong, but I can actually tell them where the fault is so they can rectify it, infact the RM article says where the error is and I have all the measurements should they want them. I'll bet I still hear nothing though.... I'm not disputing your findings but to be honest it looks fine to me - unlike the earlier one - and I'm generally quite picky. Reaction I've seen and read has been favourable so i suspect most people are happy with it and its selling well enough that there's no incentive for Heljan to act. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
61661 Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 14 hours ago, Hal Nail said: I'm not disputing your findings but to be honest it looks fine to me - unlike the earlier one - and I'm generally quite picky. Reaction I've seen and read has been favourable so i suspect most people are happy with it and its selling well enough that there's no incentive for Heljan to act. Happy New Year to all. First proper day back at the keyboard since the Christmas holidays, so just wanted to respond to these comments about the Class 25. Apologies if my failure to respond to each comment individually has come across as indifference, but that's far from the case. The feedback about the late body Class 25s in both O and OO has been overwhelmingly positive and the experts we consult during development are satisfied that the subtle curve of the cab front has been captured effectively. After the obvious flatness of the early O gauge 25, it would be easy to over-compensate and exaggerate the curve of the front (as has been the case on some other Class 25 models we've seen), but we believe that a more subtle curve captures the look of the prototype, as can be seen in the attached (borrowed) image. Hope this helps. Kindest Regards Ben Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted January 6, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) Looks like the marketing team have had a go at improving one of the arrows of indecison! Edited January 6, 2020 by Hal Nail 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Penguin 0f Doom Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 12 hours ago, 61661 said: Happy New Year to all. First proper day back at the keyboard since the Christmas holidays, so just wanted to respond to these comments about the Class 25. Apologies if my failure to respond to each comment individually has come across as indifference, but that's far from the case. The feedback about the late body Class 25s in both O and OO has been overwhelmingly positive and the experts we consult during development are satisfied that the subtle curve of the cab front has been captured effectively. After the obvious flatness of the early O gauge 25, it would be easy to over-compensate and exaggerate the curve of the front (as has been the case on some other Class 25 models we've seen), but we believe that a more subtle curve captures the look of the prototype, as can be seen in the attached (borrowed) image. Hope this helps. Kindest Regards Ben Seriously Ben? Firstly, let me re-iterate that the curve on the front of the later body 25 is better, but it is not correct, it is still too flat. Now, the overwhelmingly positive feedback is all well and good and it's great that people think it looks good, but no matter how you argue it, it is dimensionally incorrect. Before I responded, I took the liberty of having the newer bodystyle 7mm model measured up against its earlier cousin, (I believe it was yourself Ben that said the 4mm model was a lift of the 7mm model, so I'll go with that, I don't have acces to a 4mm one obviously). Now, here's the clincher, on both models, the cab doors are too wide thus pushing the correctly dimensioned cab sides forward (not far, but far enough to push the proportions out noticeably), and flattening out the front. You've got the curve too shallow as a result and whether your experts are satisfied or not is really not the point here, if they or anyone else had taken the time to check and double check, the discrepancy would have been apparent. If the 4mm model is a direct lift of the 7mm one, the doors will be too wide on that too and the inaccuracy will be replicated. I assume also that both 7mm versions use the same chassis block which if this is the case, would not help with reprofiling the body (I had to take a fair chunk off mine once the bodywork had been completed). The photo you have used above doesn't really illustrate the point you are trying to make either. I have added a picture below which shows the curve much better for you as well as some of my basic drawings showing what I have measured prior to commencing my models, (please feel free to check them out in the latest railway modeller). Just to clarify here, I used the same drawing for both bodystyles as they were used for note taking purposes only. So, here's the deal, I've pointed out where you have got it wrong and there is still an opportunity to make what is admittidley going to be a good model into a fantastic model. I have offered to consult with anyone from Heljan to sort the issue, so it's up to you now. I presume you still have my email address from our last contact, if not, drop me a pm? There can't be any harm in opening up some dialogue can there? Over to you.... 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
61661 Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Hi Penguin of Doom, Thanks for the information - all feedback is welcome. PM sent. Ben 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Mr Penguin....just out of interest, are your measurements taken from a prototype? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now