Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
13 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

I like your style. A bit like playing football in the park. 

For my own part, as a teenager in the Hornby Dublo years I built a GWR 0-6-0 from a Kitmaster City of Truro boiler, some styrene sheet and a lot of filler. It sat on a Gaiety Pannier chassis, didn't really look like a 2251 but the main thing was it ran and could pull a few wagons.

My wagon building efforts started with Airfix Minerals, two of which have been modified and fitted with modern wheels still put in an appearance on the long coal train over 50 years on. There are usually about 10 unstarted kits waiting on the shelf. 

At three score plus ten I did my first overlay with Comet sides, you're never too old to try something new.

RTR has given me things I couldn't do but there is a lot of enjoyment to be had from seeing your own efforts setting off down the track.

 

 

When I last worked on model minerals the only decent model was the Airfix, so I have a lot of them.

 

Modified as follows.

Top rail extended over door and flat smoothed.

Metal bearings added (but those horrible wheels still fitted!).

Either

Tie bar added, one brake reversed, 2 vac cylinders added, labeled as MXV.

or

Clasp brake gear, 2 vac cylinders, labeled as MCV.

 

I am happy with them.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

If an LMS 4F was to be released, painted, lettered and numbered as an SR Q, there would be an outcry and sales would be minimal.

 

Yet I was shouted down at, (and I now ignore), the freelance / generic coach thread for suggesting that these forthcoming models should not be given house-room by anyone who purports to be a modeller.

 

I fail to understand the mentality of someone who gets seriously 'wound-up' about the minutest details of a 'Terrier', yet welcomes the promise of models of coaches that never existed, just because they will bear a version of the livery which matches the locomotive.

 

IMHO, that is NOT modelling; it's playing with RTR trains.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Totally agree John, I said and still think it is a terrible backwards step.  Quite how this will push pre grouping modelling forward I do not see. Surely if these are a success, the next thing coming out will be generic bogie stock and then goods stock.

 

If anybody can explain how that advances the hobby then please do.

 

I appreciate the appeal of these coaches if you want to model a fictional light railway but there is precious little evidence of that beinga  major area of interest.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, Craigw said:

 

Totally agree John, I said and still think it is a terrible backwards step.  Quite how this will push pre grouping modelling forward I do not see. Surely if these are a success, the next thing coming out will be generic bogie stock and then goods stock.

 

If anybody can explain how that advances the hobby then please do.

 

I appreciate the appeal of these coaches if you want to model a fictional light railway but there is precious little evidence of that beinga  major area of interest.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

 

 

 

 

I just had a look, I originally assumed one of the main builders stock which was sold to various railways, but no they are trainset coaches.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

It really does amuse me how some are getting so hot under the collar about the possible release of some generic coaches - I think they look great and I'm sure will sell very well. If you don't like them and want something more accurate then don't buy them and build your own - simple!

I wonder how many of those getting terribly excited about 'trainset set coaches' run their trains on a gauge of a little over four foot.:)

 

Jerry

  • Like 4
  • Agree 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have a great deal of sympathy with the view expressed by @Craigw and others and I have to say I won't be buying the Hattons carriages myself, at the point my modelling is currently at. Nevertheless, I and some others have felt it worth while to try to nudge Hattons in the direction of making these models more realistic, not necessarily in the sense of being accurate replicas of the carriages of a particular company, but having "typical" features - or perhaps, avoiding any features that are "untypical" or simply wrong - freelance, yes, but probable. What I have very much in mind is that at a point, say 30 years ago, when my modelling tastes were less sophisticated, I would have welcomed these as a stop-gap on the road to achieving more realistic rolling stock. Everyone has to start somewhere; some move on, driven by dissatisfaction with what they have in front of them.

 

If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well. It were done well.

 

That said, I will reserve the right to wail and gnash my teeth at the more grossly inappropriate liveries announced - LNWR, GNR, SECR, in the first batch, L&Y in the second batch, to identify the very worst offenders. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, queensquare said:

It really does amuse me how some are getting so hot under the collar about the possible release of some generic coaches - I think they look great and I'm sure will sell very well. If you don't like them and want something more accurate then don't buy them and build your own - simple!

I wonder how many of those getting terribly excited about 'trainset set coaches' run their trains on a gauge of a little over four foot.:)

 

Jerry

 

Due to the fact that OO wheel are wider than scale. The thing is that the overall width is similar but the flanges are closer.

 

This is why it does not look too bad.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 minutes ago, queensquare said:

 

I wonder how many of those getting terribly excited about 'trainset set coaches' run their trains on a gauge of a little over four foot.:)

 

 

@queensquare, I've found that having a brass neck is an enormous advantage when making comments like that on RMWeb! And I use 00...

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

@queensquare, I've found that having a brass neck is an enormous advantage when making comments like that on RMWeb! And I use 00...

and ignore the lack of smoke and some even put up with god awful so called "sound" effects as well !!

 

Each to their own , if your happy , then be happy !!

 

 

5000 posts later, where does the time go !!:P:P

Edited by micklner
  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 minutes ago, micklner said:

and ignore the lack of smoke and put up with god awful so called "sound" effects as well !!

 

Each to their own , if your happy the be happy !!

 

I find the sound effects one makes oneself to be the most effective - though it's wisest to keep these to the privacy of one's own railway room. 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
25 minutes ago, MJI said:

 

Due to the fact that OO wheel are wider than scale. The thing is that the overall width is similar but the flanges are closer.

 

This is why it does not look too bad.

 

I don't have a problem with OO - or N gauge come to that, (I've just put an N gauge layout on the cover of MRJ),  and I certainly don't want to get involved in gauge wars I was simply trying to point out that its a very broad church hobby. If you don't like what a particular RTR manufacturer makes, don't buy it. We all have to make compromises in our modelling, the big difference is what compromises we choose to make. Stones and glass houses comes to mind.......

 

Jerry 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, queensquare said:

It really does amuse me how some are getting so hot under the collar about the possible release of some generic coaches - I think they look great and I'm sure will sell very well. If you don't like them and want something more accurate then don't buy them and build your own - simple!

I wonder how many of those getting terribly excited about 'trainset set coaches' run their trains on a gauge of a little over four foot.:)

 

Jerry

 

I am not terribly hot under the collar, I simply think it is a missed opportunity to advance pre grouping modelling as an option for those who have a preference for RTR. I prefer kits and building things but would have purchased some if they were grounded in reality. But they aren't so my limited RTR purchases will stay that way.

 

As I said before, I cannot imagine the reaction would have been so fulsome if Hattons had announced a generic pregroup loco or a generic contemporary diesel. To me it continues to fuel the impression that rolling stock does not matter and I think that in particular is unfortunate. 

 

Each to their own etc, and my track is to the correct gauge which possibly is reflected in my pedantry about such things.

 

Craig W  

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

  • RMweb Premium
12 hours ago, PMP said:

If there’s a good RTR version of something I’m building, I will frequently take the RTR route for expediency. There are still items that can happily co-exist together, I still make and run Airfix/Dapol 16t minerals and Bachmann’s together, and similar with other wagons. Both kit and RTR will be worked on though giving a more consistent appearance.

On CCT’s I had a Parkside version underway when Hornby’s version came out, and I made the decision to carry on with the kit. Partly because the kit I had was for the ply sided version, and to help match it into the mix of RTR items I added a representative brake gear from scraps. This was a case of the RTR item making me ‘step up’ the kit built wagon, and it looks ok in the fleet mix I have.

 

273E0206-725D-4142-B33E-319DA8CD42D9.jpeg

14A5CFB5-44C3-4AF3-86D8-4AFFC6785A62.jpeg

It is not like me to be critical of what others do but haven't you built the top one upside down?

  • Like 2
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Al,

 

It would seem they have exceptionally-low prices. They should go well. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I'm not sure, following the 'view product' link reveals that the £20 listed is just a deposit.  There is a further £77.50 to pay, plus the cost of an as-yet unspecified proprietary chassis to be purchased.  The chassis kit will be around £40, plus the usual wheel/gears/motor combination to be purchased in addition.  That take us to £137.50 for a body, tender and chassis with no wheels/gears/motor...

 

I'm sure the overall price would be somewhere around the £200 mark.  Is that exceptionally low?  Not really.  Will it be worth it for a good quality J37?  Only time will tell.

 

It will be interesting to see the final result, a this sort of 'multimedia' kit is already common in military and aero modelling - and the quality in those realms suggest that these could be really rather good.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
15 minutes ago, Craigw said:

As I said before, I cannot imagine the reaction would have been so fulsome if Hattons had announced a generic pregroup loco or a generic contemporary diesel. To me it continues to fuel the impression that rolling stock does not matter and I think that in particular is unfortunate. 

 

 

Well, yes, and if I was the supreme autocrat of RTR I would enforce a decree that locomotives must only be sold in train packs with appropriate rolling stock produced to the same standard of detail, sufficient to make a train of an authentic composition and length. 

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

  • RMweb Premium

You must be a rich man to Wantage complete train in a box. I notice lots of"split from sets " items available so it looks like you are in a minority group Compound2632.

Baz

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MJI said:

 

 

I just had a look, I originally assumed one of the main builders stock which was sold to various railways, but no they are trainset coaches.

That's a good point. If they had been that (something by Metropolitan perhaps) they would at least have been accurate for some railways.

I really don't see the point of wholly freelance models, if people will accept that, why not coaches accurate for one (or a few) railway, but offered also in other liveries? They would be no more inaccurate for those other lines, and at least would be correct for some.

It does seem odd that when threads analyse the accuracy or otherwise of RTR locomotives in great detail that freelance coaches seem a good idea.

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

  • RMweb Premium

This was all done to death on the appropriate thread. It seems that people who didn't get much support on that one now wish to continue the discussion on this thread instead.

 

As "queensquare" says, there is an easy answer. If you don't like the product, don't buy it.

 

There are plenty of people out there who will be happy to get some "near enough" carriages to go behind their RTR pre-grouping loco. There will be a much smaller number who follow a specific company and would insist on having accurate models of their actual company carriages. It is clearly a commercial decision to make the project viable and they will be much better than the alternatives presently available.

 

I have been known to build a model or two and I like my models to be as "right" as I can get them but I choose not to act towards those who do things differently as if they are "just" playing toy trains.

  • Like 7
  • Agree 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

I'm not sure, following the 'view product' link reveals that the £20 listed is just a deposit.  There is a further £77.50 to pay, plus the cost of an as-yet unspecified proprietary chassis to be purchased.  The chassis kit will be around £40, plus the usual wheel/gears/motor combination to be purchased in addition.  That take us to £137.50 for a body, tender and chassis with no wheels/gears/motor...

 

I'm sure the overall price would be somewhere around the £200 mark.  Is that exceptionally low?  Not really.  Will it be worth it for a good quality J37?  Only time will tell.

 

It will be interesting to see the final result, a this sort of 'multimedia' kit is already common in military and aero modelling - and the quality in those realms suggest that these could be really rather good.

I was (ignorantly) assuming that the price shown was the 'final' price. Al (Barry Ten) put me right on that.

 

If the final thing (everything purchased) is a fine kit, then £200.00 is very good value in my book. I know that one can get a full-blown RTR Pacific for less than that, but can one get a pre-Grouping NBR 4-4-0 for the same price RTR?  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Craigw said:

 

Totally agree John, I said and still think it is a terrible backwards step.  Quite how this will push pre grouping modelling forward I do not see. Surely if these are a success, the next thing coming out will be generic bogie stock and then goods stock.

 

If anybody can explain how that advances the hobby then please do.

 

I appreciate the appeal of these coaches if you want to model a fictional light railway but there is precious little evidence of that beinga  major area of interest.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

 

 

I understand your point of view, Craig, but I wonder how different this is from folk 50 years ago converting Tri-ang Clerestories into all sorts of other companies' panelled coaches?

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Just now, St Enodoc said:

I understand your point of view, Craig, but I wonder how different this is from folk 50 years ago converting Tri-ang Clerestories into all sorts of other companies' panelled coaches?

 

As you say nothing to prevent anyone getting their modelling tools out and using the "wrong" coaches as a basis to modify them into something closer to what they want. People seem to forget that for many years that was the only way to get something that resembled what you wanted, without building from scratch and we were pleased to be able to do that.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say I've not paid much attention to the Hattons' pre-Grouping RTR carriages. They're of no use to me, even if they were 'accurate'. 

 

Knowing the Hattons' management team quite well, I'm sure that team has made a business-based, commercial decision. Will the products sell, even if they're, at best, generic? If so, let's make them. 

 

Those who cannot 'stand them' need not buy them, and so on. 

 

I have to say, though, that a sort of opportunity has been missed. I assume none of the coaches in the range is an actual model of any type. Perhaps if an actual type had been made (say, for the sake of argument, a GWR four-wheeler?), then it would have been 'right' for at least one application. 

 

I'm sure the whole lot will be beautifully-decorated, and find homes on many trainsets (note the single word - LB is a trainset). I'm sure many of the 'GNR'-liveried ones will go behind all those Stirling Singles. Rightly or wrongly!

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

8 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I understand your point of view, Craig, but I wonder how different this is from folk 50 years ago converting Tri-ang Clerestories into all sorts of other companies' panelled coaches?

Interesting, John,

 

Were those old Tri-ang clerestories even right for GWR types?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Agree 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...