KR Models announce the Consett Iron Ore Wagon

[johndon]

I know that one of the real things derailed at Leadgate and I have a photo taken of one of the bogies lying, disconnected from the rest of the wagon, at the side of the track.  Apparently the body was there too but no photos that I've ever been able to find...

[Craigw]

4 hours ago, 'CHARD said:

 

Another version of Rule One!  

 

But this raises the interesting point, if you're going to the trouble of detailing the underframe at all, and information is available to do so correctly, why on earth would you wilfully get it wrong?

 

The days of this fraternity tolerating generic blob undergubbins are long gone.

 

 

...and if you tolerate this, your generic loco will be next....

 

Yet freelance passenger coaches are welcomed with open arms.

 

Go figure.

 

Craig W

[peach james]

57 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Is it ethically acceptable to announce a model in a half baked state and expect the experts on a forum to provide the research needed to bring it to market?

 

Bernard

Equally, would it be ethical for you to have knowledge, keep said knowledge to yourself, knowing that said knowledge is from a small pool, and then complain about a product after it is to market?  

I can understand why KR Models might NOT have wanted to go to Michael Edge about the Fell- it cost Michael time (and probably money) to get the expertise he has, and he is marketing a competing product...so said knowledge has value to Michael. 

But it doesn't appear as though you have a model business making the Tyne Dock hoppers...   I have more of a business offering than you do for them, I have made them in L scale.  I couldn't find a price point that worked, so they were only ever my own...

Exit of BTM by Peach James, on Flickr

(on the right hand side, the corner of one is visible)- and yes, I am aware that it is far more "inspired by" than a scale model !

 

I find it rich that modelers would not be willing to share information to any manufacturer in order to get a better model built for all.  The way that I see it is that these hoppers are likely only ever going to be made by one RTR manufacturer, and that getting the basics as right as possible is the core to this.   If you have info, and hold it back because you are planning a kit, I can understand.  Or perhaps you are under contract to HornBachRapiAccuoL, and have already provided the info- but if that's the case, you should still be providing it to all comers, in my view.  It's a matter of getting as accurate as is practical models out.  Otherwise, what I hear is talk - noise = 0.    If you are a manufacturer, then I understand the reluctance to provide "free" information to your competition.  I wouldn't consider it fair game for KR Models to have taken a Bradwell model & scanned it as the start of their work.  But asking for info seems a reasonable step- there are those here who seem to take the damn them for this, or damn them for that view...

I may be interested in a set, after all I have a L gauge set already, and they make an impressive goods train for club running.  There have been sets made up from HO hoppers which are similar, I am aware of at least 2 sets in the Toronto area.

[RBAGE]

1 hour ago, johndon said:

 

Sorry Bob, you've lost me there...

The air hose coming out of the end of the wagon. Not your build, the KR Models CAD image.

I think they need to speak to someone familiar with the hoppers. Maybe ask someone to verify the CAD before the cut any more metal on the tooling. 

[jonhall]

6 minutes ago, peach james said:

I find it rich that modelers would not be willing to share information to any manufacturer in order to get a better model built for all.  The way that I see it is that these hoppers are likely only ever going to be made by one RTR manufacturer, and that getting the basics as right as possible is the core to this.   If you have info, and hold it back because you are planning a kit, I can understand.  Or perhaps you are under contract to HornBachRapiAccuoL, and have already provided the info- but if that's the case, you should still be providing it to all comers, in my view.  It's a matter of getting as accurate as is practical models out.  

 

All knowledge has a monetary value, those of us that have it have probably paid out over the years to get that knowledge, which might be by travelling to see and measure things, travelling to archives to research things, paying for copies of things in archives or paying for source material on ebay, as well as all sorts of other ways.

 

Why should we not expect a commercial company to pay us for that accumulated knowledge?

 

Would you expect a time served craftsman the same rate as a fresh apprentice? 

 

In the case of Mike Edge, or David Bradwell they will, I believe, have spent a great deal more time researching their products than KR models, because both of them have a passion for the item in question, I may be wrong, but the KRM release list is too scattergun to be much more than chosen 'because he believes they will sell' (in itself a sound business model) and that he believes that sufficient research material is available. The FTG SPA was the same, as were a number of the Dave Jones era Dapol models (and his own range).

 

In the case of the gas turbine, KRM seem to be copying a large-scale model, rather than from primary research, therefore my (conscious) bias is the belief that everything else of his is likely to be 'thinly' researched.

 

jon

 

 

[Les1952]

I do hope these will be available in N.

 

If so it might tempt me to revisit the Stanley area with the next layout once Bregenbach is finished....

 

Les

[RBAGE]

17 minutes ago, peach james said:

Equally, would it be ethical for you to have knowledge, keep said knowledge to yourself, knowing that said knowledge is from a small pool, and then complain about a product after it is to market?  

I can understand why KR Models might NOT have wanted to go to Michael Edge about the Fell- it cost Michael time (and probably money) to get the expertise he has, and he is marketing a competing product...so said knowledge has value to Michael. 

But it doesn't appear as though you have a model business making the Tyne Dock hoppers...   I have more of a business offering than you do for them, I have made them in L scale.  I couldn't find a price point that worked, so they were only ever my own...

Exit of BTM by Peach James, on Flickr

(on the right hand side, the corner of one is visible)- and yes, I am aware that it is far more "inspired by" than a scale model !

 

I find it rich that modelers would not be willing to share information to any manufacturer in order to get a better model built for all.  The way that I see it is that these hoppers are likely only ever going to be made by one RTR manufacturer, and that getting the basics as right as possible is the core to this.   If you have info, and hold it back because you are planning a kit, I can understand.  Or perhaps you are under contract to HornBachRapiAccuoL, and have already provided the info- but if that's the case, you should still be providing it to all comers, in my view.  It's a matter of getting as accurate as is practical models out.  Otherwise, what I hear is talk - noise = 0.    If you are a manufacturer, then I understand the reluctance to provide "free" information to your competition.  I wouldn't consider it fair game for KR Models to have taken a Bradwell model & scanned it as the start of their work.  But asking for info seems a reasonable step- there are those here who seem to take the damn them for this, or damn them for that view...

I may be interested in a set, after all I have a L gauge set already, and they make an impressive goods train for club running.  There have been sets made up from HO hoppers which are similar, I am aware of at least 2 sets in the Toronto area.

Be under no illusions, KR or anyone else are bringing models to market to make money. They are not doing it as a favour to the modelling fraternity. It is the sellers responsibility to ensure the product is fit for purpose.

That means, making sure they have done an appropriate level of research to be able to come up with something that resembles the intended vehicle. If they can't source appropriate information they should not have embarked on the project in the first place. If an onlooker wants to offer advice, that's fine, but the manufacturer should not expect it.

Research cost money. They should not expect Joe train spotter to have done it for him, for free.

I have been in a position where I had spent time and money doing a detailed measurement and photographic study of two preserved vans. Not cheap. Even so, a potential manufacturer expected me to provide the fruits of my labour, gratis.

Needless to say, the van will be produced by some other means.

Research is part of the process of bringing a product to market.

[cctransuk]

21 minutes ago, peach james said:

I find it rich that modelers would not be willing to share information to any manufacturer in order to get a better model built for all.

 

I don't !!

 

Acquiring knowledge takes time and, more often than not, money; (buying books and plans, spending valuable time researching primary sources).

 

This is part of the development process for a commercial model and has a value; if a potential manufacturer wishes to take advantage of a someone's personal investment, they should be prepared to pay for it. I have been asked - and paid for - my transfer designs, to be used on commercial models; and that is how it should be.

 

It would seem that KR Models' research policy is to make a token stab at producing a CAD for their new projects, and then throw it into the railway modelling arena for us to throw up our collective hands in horror, and redo the job for them - FOC! Ingenious - but hardly an honourable business model.

 

The alternative interpretation is that they do not know much at all about the prototype railway - hardly a good basis for a model railway business.

 

John Isherwood.

[Georgeconna]

How many times do you actually look under a wagon and go ooh Loverlystuff?...Maybe once just taken out of the box but afterwards, personally me never afterwards once on the layout.

 

Good Luck KR. bit to far north for me though.

 

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Is it ethically acceptable to announce a model in a half baked state and expect the experts on a forum to provide the research needed to bring it to market?

 

Happens all the time doesn't it?

 

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Happens all the time doesn't it?

 

 

...... because someone here always falls for it !!

 

What we need is a deafening silence next time it happens - except for a chorus of "Loads of errors - but we're not telling"!

 

It ain't going to happen, though, is it?

 

John Isherwood.

[rorz101uk]

I’m looking forward for this wagon, I’m sure KR Model will get it right. Hopefully to buy a pack of 9! Just an idea, could you produce a add on pack to fit the extra equipment to the 9F?
 

Also do these block trains have a dedicated Brake vans to accommodate the air pipe? 

[johndon]

1 minute ago, rorz101uk said:

I’m looking forward for this wagon, I’m sure KR Model will get it right. Hopefully to buy a pack of 9! Just an idea, could you produce a add on pack to fit the extra equipment to the 9F?
 

Also do these block trains have a dedicated Brake vans to accommodate the air pipe? 

 

The brake vans were standard 20T vans.  Dave Alexander used to do a conversion kit for the 9F with the extra bits so hopefully the person who bought his stuff will bring it back in the future.  In the meantime, Lanarkshire Models do the air pumps...

 

John

[adb968008]

9 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 

 

Sometimes some people have a lot more knowledge and experience of how the Chinese factories work, so instead of accusing them of trolling try winding your necks in and quit brown nosing. 

 

The reason I put 'Deja Vu' is the lack of easy research which could, and should have been carried out prior to spending money in the factory.

You may have knowledge of Chinese factories, but your still working assumptions.

 

Do you know the working arrangement of KRModels ?

Do you know if they have put money down ?

 

I have no idea the arrangement, but I could proffer an alternative possibilities to your assumed buy/supply hypothesis based on my own experience working in China....

In several cases, in my own career industry, I have found some level of willingness to invest at their own risk in a development and seek a western partner to move it forwards... in those situations the western partner works with what’s being offered, rather than dictating what the product looks like.

 

Another route is a shared risk buy & supply relationship, where the risk on development is undertaken by the Chinese supplier, in return for a minimum purchase commitment. Again this restricts the level of R&D input by the buyer upto the willingness of the supplier / additional costs being offered.
 

Both of these are partnership based models.

 

As I said, no idea the arrangement of KRModels, but I do want to challenge the one party line of the disgruntled posts about KRModels and show there are other possibilities to pure Western Cash Buyer-Chinese Supplier relationships.
 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2020 by adb968008

[RBAGE]

10 minutes ago, johndon said:

 

The brake vans were standard 20T vans.  Dave Alexander used to do a conversion kit for the 9F with the extra bits so hopefully the person who bought his stuff will bring it back in the future.  In the meantime, Lanarkshire Models do the air pumps...

 

John

I've converted about eight 9Fs using Dave Alexander's kit. I think I still have seven of them. 

However, I am advised that the Lanarkshire models pumps are far superior to those that Dave used to produce. They are even to scale. Dave's were a bit over scale. I'm sure Dave won't mind me saying so after buying so many of them.  Where ever he is, I'm sure he will have found someone to have lengthy conversations with about the state of the country.

 

Now there's a thought. Once these wagons are released, people will be clamouring for a Tyne Dock 9F. If I can get in before Bachmann do one, I could make a killing.

[96701]

1 minute ago, RBAGE said:

Now there's a thought. Once these wagons are released, people will be clamouring for a Tyne Dock 9F. If I can get in before Bachmann do one, I could make a killing.

Good luck with that then, bearing in mind all the critics on here.

[Les1952]

Having found the website I've put in an expression of interest for the hopper in N.  If it comes off I'll have nine- I can think of a scenario that would send a rake through Croft Spa.

 

I can't think of a justification for a Fell, but I've expressed interest in one in N as well.  A rule 1 loco if ever there was one....

 

Les

 

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, peach james said:

Equally, would it be ethical for you to have knowledge, keep said knowledge to yourself, knowing that said knowledge is from a small pool, and then complain about a product after it is to market?  
 

In the early 1990s , I helped a model railway company, the old fashioned way, to gain access to a locomotive, draw it, photograph it. It required volunteers to take a day off work, arrange a shunter to be refuelled, a shed shunt, for 2 days.
A year plus later, said loco was released, bearing that preserved locos livery and number.

The railway received a big fat zero for their efforts, not even a model for display, and to add insult to injury, they even delivered supplies to its own shop some months later than other retailers.

 

Railway in question decided to repaint the loco shortly after.  Ive heard similar tales elsewhere.

In recent years some loco owners now increasingly copyright their locomotives unique aspects in preservation, specifically aimed at limiting commercial exploitation of their locomotives (not just model railways but any aspects of branded merchandise).

 

What does your ethics say about that ?

 

Model companies are not charities. They are businesses.

For any business to thrive, it needs to exploit and stretch ethics for commercial gain.

 

Forums like this are a wealth of knowledge, and if engaged the right way, many will gladly share. But if engaged badly, will simply sit silent and let events take their course before commenting. Similarly some companies dont care to engage and just do their own thing regardless the advice being offered.

 

Some people are currently expressing frustration at volunteering to be COVID vaccine testers, who now discover that the companies they volunteered for intend to offer for profit solutions in other countries (Doh ! You might think).. But it’s the same principle.

 

The phrase is “Whats in it for me”, and remember it’s not just the guy with the knowledge saying that... the recipient of that knowledge is also saying that.

 

At the end of the day, it’s business.

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2020 by adb968008

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Is it ethically acceptable to announce a model in a half baked state and expect the experts on a forum to provide the research needed to bring it to market?

I made the comment long ago that I considered KR to be very lacking in professionalism so you know my feelings. Even with new blood coming on board I see no improvement in the situation. Not the sort of people that I would choose to deal with however much I might like a particular product. 

Bernard

They're not the first to do it (if that actually is there intention?).  Often CADs shown on RMweb are criticised or attention is drawn to shortcomings or errors.  However a certain person who shall not be named made a habit - as far as i could see - of posting CADs and even more so asking umpteen questions to the extent that RMweb members probably did the majority of his research on some models for him.  And even then he didn't get some of them right and his final CADs contained noticeable errors of which he had been made aware.   But all of that is of course another story 

[PMP]

12 hours ago, Craigw said:

 

Yet freelance passenger coaches are welcomed with open arms.

 

Go figure.

 

Craig W

Because they are freelance and everyone knows that, (or should do). The Genesis range was announced, and advertised/marketed as exactly that, Freelance, they’re not trying to be a particular prototype and aren’t being sold as such. Products like these hoppers however are being sold as the ‘Tyne Dock’ hoppers, therefore ‘we’ expect them to be researched and tooled accordingly to the prototype we are familiar with.

[Enterprisingwestern]

3 minutes ago, PMP said:

Because they are freelance and everyone knows that, (or should do). The Genesis range was announced, and advertised/marketed as exactly that, Freelance, they’re not trying to be a particular prototype and aren’t being sold as such. Products like these hoppers however are being sold as the ‘Tyne Dock’ hoppers, therefore ‘we’ expect them to be researched and tooled accordingly to the prototype we are familiar with.

 

Well said.

Hattons have never tried to pass off any of their Genesis coaches as, say, a NLR 28' 4 compartment all 1st, only ever freelance, based on.

Now, if KRM had issued their original CAD as a model based on the Consett hopper, marketed it and sold it as such, and sod the consequences of inaccuracy, it would probably be on the shelves now selling well to the "it looks like a Consett hopper to me so it's OK" brigade, and money would be rolling in.

The fact that they choose to go for the full fat version seems to infer a lack of research ability and marketing nous, but then again, we've been here before.

 

Mike.

[Bernard Lamb]

13 hours ago, peach james said:

Equally, would it be ethical for you to have knowledge, keep said knowledge to yourself, knowing that said knowledge is from a small pool, and then complain about a product after it is to market?  



 

Some time ago I was involved with research on a particular subject for a book. I posted material that was not going to be included in the book on the forum. One particular forum member, with a forum name that identified a position on the railways, would make comments about my posts. The irony was that I had a spread sheet from his boss that contained a very comprehensive set of data on the subject. 

I would not publish any material that had a commercial value and I most certainly would not comment about any errors that I noticed due to having access to  restricted circulation information.

 

Bernard

 

[Ouroborus]

15 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

 

 

What we need is a deafening silence next time it happens 

 

 

 

Here's hoping

[Roy Langridge]

On 08/10/2020 at 08:37, Barry O said:

 

It should not be up to us to provide a list of things which need to be corrected..they should slow down the number of models they are trying to do and get the information correct. 

 

 

Point me to a single manufacturer thread where advice and omission and errors have not been pointed out?

 

It is all part of the process today.

 

Roy

[New Haven Neil]

I know someone who has an original GM drawing of the hoppers, it was used to develop the Bradwell model, I don't know if Dave used it too, but they live/d in the same town, Dave was a pal.  He probably looks in here as he's on RMWeb (but is quiet) so its up to him if he wants to contribute  but a) he is a rivet counter and b) a boffin, so the approach shown on this thread by KR would not curry much favour with him!.....but like the Fell and Mike Edge he won't give it away for others to make money from.

 

The information is out there if you put the work in.