Wright writes.....

[St Enodoc]

4 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Interesting, John,

 

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

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

No! But that didn't stop the likes of Peter Denny and Terry Gough converting them to representations (my emphasis) of GCR and LB&SCR coaches, for example. I even have one on the Mid-Cornwall Lines - a Camping Coach.

Edited October 18, 2019 by St Enodoc
Speling

[Clive Mortimore]

While I am in the if you don't like it don't buy it camp, but I can see the attraction to many off these planned 4 and 6 wheelers after all a model is a representation.

 

If those in the can't do, shan't do and that will do camp buy them to enhance their representation of what they feel is a model of a railway and they are having fun doing so, then all the whining and whinging by us purist ain't gonna change a thing. In fact we will look as daft to them as they do to us.

[thegreenhowards]

I've made some more progress with the N2 kit I showed earlier this week. As a reminder I bought this with very old fashioned wheels and motor and have replaced them with a DJH GB1 and Romford wheels; the body is mainly brass.

 

It's now run in and working smoothly. I have tested it's haulage capability and it can do everything I hoped for and more! Here is a video showing it on 17 coaches which is more than I will ever need it to do in practice. My Hornby ones just laughed when asked to pull the same train!

 

 

The paint job is not very smooth and I will want it in British Railways livery anyway, so the next job is a light sanding on the flat surfaces, tough up the paint and line and number up as a KX 1950s loco. 

 

Andy

[johnarcher]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

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.

I at least hadn't seen the other thread, so just reacted here.

I wasn't intending to criticise any buyer either (or get into the toy/model thing).

I just don't see the point of making them freelance. If people are happy to use 'near enough' carriages then fine, that's up to them, but why is it better if said carriages are freelance, would it be less acceptable if they were actual models of real other company's vehicles, whether just repainted or a base for conversion?

Is a freelance model in, eg, GNR livery any better than an LBSC or LSW coach in that livery?  (Actually LSW ones would have been quite good, they went all over the place secondhand, there was hardly a minor railway that didn't have one or two ex-LSW coaches).

Then as well as the 'freelance' market they would have had at least some 'accurate' market as well.

[cctransuk]

13 minutes ago, johnarcher said:

I at least hadn't seen the other thread, so just reacted here.

I wasn't intending to criticise any buyer either (or get into the toy/model thing).

I just don't see the point of making them freelance. If people are happy to use 'near enough' carriages then fine, that's up to them, but why is it better if said carriages are freelance, would it be less acceptable if they were actual models of real other company's vehicles, whether just repainted or a base for conversion?

Is a freelance model in, eg, GNR livery any better than an LBSC or LSW coach in that livery?  (Actually LSW ones would have been quite good, they went all over the place secondhand, there was hardly a minor railway that didn't have one or two ex-LSW coaches).

Then as well as the 'freelance' market they would have had at least some 'accurate' market as well.

 

Precisely !!!!!!!!!!!!!  What on earth is the point of a 'right-for-nothing' coach?

 

If, as we are told, there is a substantial market for fictitious coaches in 'sort-of' correct liveries, there must be a greater market for prototypical coaches in prototypical and fictitious liveries.

 

...... or is the thinking that, as the coaches are correct for nothing, everybody who buys them runs coaches that are as incorrect as mine? (So that makes it somehow OK).

 

The strategy for this project immediately rules out sales to those who would have purchased a prototypical coach in its correct livery.

 

Muddled thinking, IMHO.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[PMP]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

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

Ozzie rules mate.

[jwealleans]

Would that be the export model?

[Black Marlin]

Hello Tony. In the spirit of show and tell, I've just spent 5 hours painting the sea (it was quite a small brush!). This was my first effort - ever, in any capacity - with artist's acrylics, and I'm pleased at how it's come out. (Obviously I haven't added a gloss finish yet - I will do that over the next few days). There will, in time, be a lot more painting to do - do you have any hints or tips for a complete novice such as I?

Regards,
Gavin

[t-b-g]

36 minutes ago, PMP said:

Ozzie rules mate.

 

I hadn't allowed for your varied taste!

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Precisely !!!!!!!!!!!!!  What on earth is the point of a 'right-for-nothing' coach?

 

If, as we are told, there is a substantial market for fictitious coaches in 'sort-of' correct liveries, there must be a greater market for prototypical coaches in prototypical and fictitious liveries.

 

...... or is the thinking that, as the coaches are correct for nothing, everybody who buys them runs coaches that are as incorrect as mine? (So that makes it somehow OK).

 

The strategy for this project immediately rules out sales to those who would have purchased a prototypical coach in its correct livery.

 

Muddled thinking, IMHO.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, just as those who feel otherwise are entitled to theirs. I just don't see the need to repeat the discussion here when the matter has its own dedicated thread.

[TheSignalEngineer]

I don't see the generic coaches as being for the purist, but if they draw people in some of whom go on to build a modelling masterpiece all well and good. Perhaps some people who buy may be encouraged to visit exhibitions as they get hooked.

 

As for me, my progression over the last 60+ years has been one of evolution

1953 with Hornby O Gaouge clockwork fixed to sheets of hardboard  to make it quicker to lay and put away

1954 my pride and joy, Father Christmas brought me a Bassett Lowke Prince Charles. Really thought that was the dog's wotsits.

1958 went into Hornby Dublo 3-rail

1960 started plastic kit buuilding

1962 built first 2-rail layout for my little cousin

1967 Parents moved house and I was working away, Work, College and girls took precedence over modelling.

1976 now married with children and own house. Built retro HD layout

1978 built small roundy for son. Around that time Mainline and Airfix were changing the game with better models. Started building better plastic kits.

1982 Moved house, too much work, trains got packed away except for son's layout which was used as a test bed for my occasional kit builds.

2002 Approaching my intended retirement and started again with a shunting plan for a test bed.

2007 Time on hands (occasionally) so laid foundations of present layout. May get finished sometime soon, but meanwhile have progressed from what would now be regarded as toys to better stuff including overlaying layout coaches with brass sides and making non-available items from RTR.

Edited October 19, 2019 by TheSignalEngineer
typos

[gr.king]

I remain hopeful, although not very hopeful in view of the way that some seem to be trying to steer the Hattons vintage carriage design towards a close match for a few companies' coaches and nothing at all like others, that the eventual product might still be both sufficiently "typical" and sufficiently NEUTRAL to allow a fairly modest level of conversion or re-detailing work to produce vehicles that (while not exact, I openly admit) are at least reasonably believable impressions of even the more unusual carriage styles used by some of the pre-group railways.

 

Apart from suiting, straight out of the box, those who will accept wholly generic versions, the models may then find a market among those who want something better but who can't / won't try to build the whole lot for themselves, and those who want minimal effort (but reasonable) "place holders" until they reach the time of being able to have something even better on their layout.

 

£30 per small carriage purely as a basis for butchery may, I realise, seem expensive, but it may be an option. Better than no option at all?

[cctransuk]

18 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, just as those who feel otherwise are entitled to theirs. I just don't see the need to repeat the discussion here when the matter has its own dedicated thread.

 

You need to look elsewhere for whoever it was that raised the topic of 'generic' coaches here - it certainly wasn't me.

 

Nonetheless, the subject having been raised, I reserve the right to participate in the debate.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[t-b-g]

52 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

You need to look elsewhere for whoever it was that raised the topic of 'generic' coaches here - it certainly wasn't me.

 

Nonetheless, the subject having been raised, I reserve the right to participate in the debate.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

I just got bored with the other thread and didn't want to get bored of it being repeated here. The same few people repeating their views over and over doesn't make for an interesting read.

[cctransuk]

2 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I just got bored with the other thread and didn't want to get bored of it being repeated here. The same few people repeating their views over and over doesn't make for an interesting read.

 

I too got bored with the other thread - that's why I pressed the 'IGNORE' button. However, the discussion here seemed to be somewhat more reasoned and therefore constructive - that's why I joined in.

 

In neither thread has anyone explained why models of real coaches with a variety of fictional liveries would not have been as / more acceptable to the 'not too fussed' amongst us as fictional coaches in 'sort-of' correct liveries. I had hoped that this thread might have enlightened me - it seems that I am doomed to be disappointed !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Barry O]

27 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

I too got bored with the other thread - that's why I pressed the 'IGNORE' button. However, the discussion here seemed to be somewhat more reasoned and therefore constructive - that's why I joined in.

 

In neither thread has anyone explained why models of real coaches with a variety of fictional liveries would not have been as / more acceptable to the 'not too fussed' amongst us as fictional coaches in 'sort-of' correct liveries. I had hoped that this thread might have enlightened me - it seems that I am doomed to be disappointed !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Perhaps the market for specific coaches is quite limited but the market for Generic modifiable ones is a lot larger?

 

I have seen Triang clerestories in a variety of colour schemes over the years. If you can't (or won't ) build a specific Etched Brass kit for a specific vehicle but like the colour scheme these may help you on your road to pre-grouping modelling ..I do note that you could turn these into a representation of an NCB miners train...now there is an idea...

 

Baz

[cctransuk]

8 minutes ago, Barry O said:

 ..I do note that you could turn these into a representation of an NCB miners train...

 

I think that those of us who feel that this project is a lost opportunity will readily concede that these coaches could be turned into a representation of ......... anything.

 

The point is that even secondhand coaches, operated by the NCB, had an origin with one of the mainline companies - and could be identified as such.

 

If the modeller cannot identify that origin - or doesn't care to - a model of an actual coach would do just as well - unless someone can explain to me why not. (I really hope so - I am starting to feel that I am missing the obvious)!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Hitchin Junction]

On the generic coach subject, I picked up on an earlier comment's reference to the "Broad Church" hobby.  I beg to differ. In my experience there are several different railway related hobbies and endeavors,  which don't necessarily overlap, that have been lumped together under a "generic name", such as "Model Railways". Usually by commercial interests  

 

That explains the continual disparate opinions on so many subjects that occur on this forum. More specialised groups don't have those issues.

 

Tim

[johnarcher]

39 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Perhaps the market for specific coaches is quite limited but the market for Generic modifiable ones is a lot larger?

 

I have seen Triang clerestories in a variety of colour schemes over the years. If you can't (or won't ) build a specific Etched Brass kit for a specific vehicle but like the colour scheme these may help you on your road to pre-grouping modelling ..I do note that you could turn these into a representation of an NCB miners train...now there is an idea...

 

Baz

Aren't models of real coaches modifiable? Especially if a 'representation' of something else is all you want (and all you'd get from the generic ones anyway probably).

Would the Triang clerestories have been less used as other things if they had been slightly better representations of GW coaches?

 

It's just I don't see the point of not getting whatever market there would be for them as an actual prototype as well as the modifying or just paint in other liveries markets.

[Philou]

......... but whose actual coach? Rhymney Railway, Taff Vale, LNWR, SECR, NBR, GN etc ? It'll be right for one company and not for anybody else. The market would be far more limited and at the end the commissioner needs to see a return on his money .......

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[johnarcher]

15 minutes ago, Philou said:

......... but whose actual coach? Rhymney Railway, Taff Vale, LNWR, SECR, NBR, GN etc ? It'll be right for one company and not for anybody else. The market would be far more limited and at the end the commissioner needs to see a return on his money .......

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

Why would the market be more limited for a coach that is right for one company than for one that is right for none?

Does the fact that it is actually right for one company make it less usable for others than a freelance one?

[uax6]

My take on the generic coach would be to select a grouping company which has a very good representation of pre-grouping locos already out, like say the Southern. Then make a set of coaches that are correct for the locos available to pull. That way they are correct and will sell.

Leave it a couple of years and then do the next company, say the LNER, and do the same. You can work your way round doing coaches properly over a period of time.

I am in no doubt that they would sell, and if done properly the cost would be recouped, but I would think they would be a bit more than £30 quid each, say £40-50, which would still be good value if done correctly...

 

Anyway, I'll still be plugging away at plasticard making my lot list. One day I may even have enough for a train!

 

Andy G

Edited October 18, 2019 by uax6

[Headstock]

I use to love model railways when it was all about small suppliers and making things. Now that it is dominated by big business and wishlists I've lost interest to be honest. Fortunately, I have just about completed what I set out to achieve on my 'things to do list' (see what I did there) and can bow out quite fulfilled. On the the broad church thing, I'm rather glad to be an atheist thanks very much.

[Andy Hayter]

25 minutes ago, johnarcher said:

Why would the market be more limited for a coach that is right for one company than for one that is right for none?

Does the fact that it is actually right for one company make it less usable for others than a freelance one?

 

Because you could not then sell it as generic.  You could only sell it a (say) SECR and then sell others as in other liveries, but the "market" would know these were SECR ( and inherently wrong).  Sell them as wrong (generic) and 95%+ of the market is happy.  I know that makes little sense logically but since when have people been logical?

 

Don't get me wrong I too would have loved to see an accurate representation of something specific, but I do think I understand the commercial logic of what has been done.   

[APOLLO]

Well I'll stick my neck out and say the proposed Hattons generic coach range is superb. If you like em, buy then, run them as is or tinker with them. Isn't that what our hobby is about ? If you don't like them, don't buy them. 

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=594

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=596

 

I'll buy a departmental one and weather it / tatty it up a bit to go with my breakdown train - a replacement / addition to the current weathered & tattyfied Tri-ang clerestory !!!!

 

Lots of hot air talked about "realism" - I look at bridges on layouts - and boy are there some bloopers on most exhibition layouts, no wing walls, unsupported girders, thin girders, impossible girder lengths, impossible (in real life) structure design etc etc - and DON'T get me started about my pet hate of lines disappearing off stage through a blatantly obvious and non camouflaged hole in the sky !!!!. Folks should get these obvious visual errors correct before bleating on about coaches.

 

NOT Little Bytham though Tony, Your bridge(s) and main line entrances / exits to your fiddle yards are excellent - (I've read all about it in your book) - as to your coaches - simply superb !!!!

 

Brit15