N gauge Class 50

[MGR Hooper!]

People should be and are entitled to opinions, it is the basis of a democratic society, one that seems to be decaying at the moment 

 

 

It all boils down to how people voice their opinions at the end of the day. No matter how much of an expert you are on a specific class of locomotives etc. if you have feedback, you better be polite about it than to give feedback and add a whole lot of bashing inbetween. When people become so confident about a brand's capability or lack of it to produce something they're going to start tearing it apart wherever they can.

 

As a designer myself I know how it gets to me when someone has feedback to give and they're quite rude. I've had customers also give me some vociferous feedback only for me to show them that they themselves are wrong. On the other hand I've had many polite customers who have feedback to give and they provide it in a humble manner.

 

 

There's a big difference between these sentences...

- I'd like to point out that there's an error with the cab profile and I hope it can be addressed

 

- The cab profile is awful and it spoils the look of the entire model. How can the designer not see this? How can there be such a simple error? I hope that it will be addressed otherwise this model isn't worth buying.

 

 

Also I'd like to point out that the experts on RMweb account for a very small amount of customers. It's not anywhere close to 50% also. You everyday Joe is going to look at it and know it's a Class 50 and buy it and be amazed by the detail and smooth running mechanism and so on. These errors will affect a few people who can either be useful and pass on their feedback to a proper source or just not buy it and save the others the degrading posts if you cannot highlight issues politely.

Edited October 19, 2018 by MGR Hooper!

[jamespetts]

The degree of open hostility often prevalent on this forum is positively disturbing. There may well be flaws in the forthcoming Dapol class 50 (I must confess, I struggle to see them even when pointed out, but perhaps I am not as sensitive to these things as others), but there is no need for people to be so emotive about things. It is perfectly possible to point out flaws in a model politely without (totally inappropriate) overt hostility.

[Chris M]

The CAD was discussed at length on the Dapol website with many people contributing in an attempt to get this loco right. Dapol did listen and did make changes as I recall. Its a shame that some of the experts here didn't contribute at a time when it might have made a difference. Interestingly the CAD does seem to show what looks like the correct profile of the bonnet but the route indicator box looks like it had problems then. Not that I i knew enough to comment at the time. The posts relating to the CAD have disappeared with the changing Dapol website but the last CAD before production can be seen here https://digest.Dapol.co.uk/forum/n-gauge-models/diesel/class-50-n/project-managers-blog-al/309-n-gauge-class-50-development

[TomE]

There's a big difference between these sentences...

- I'd like to point out that there's an error with the cab profile and I hope it can be addressed

 

- The cab profile is awful and it spoils the look of the entire model. How can the designer not see this? How can there be such a simple error? I hope that it will be addressed otherwise this model isn't worth buying.

 

Quote any post on this thread that uses the kind of language in your second example?

 

Comparing an EP to the prototype it purports to represent and highlighting areas where there are issues or errors is not bashing, or being rude, or being hostile. It's using evidence to support observation.

 

The CAD was discussed at length on the Dapol website with many people contributing in an attempt to get this loco right. Dapol did listen and did make changes as I recall. Its a shame that some of the experts here didn't contribute at a time when it might have made a difference. Interestingly the CAD does seem to show what looks like the correct profile of the bonnet but the route indicator box looks like it had problems then. Not that I i knew enough to comment at the time. The posts relating to the CAD have disappeared with the changing Dapol website but the last CAD before production can be seen here https://digest.Dapol.co.uk/forum/n-gauge-models/diesel/class-50-n/project-managers-blog-al/309-n-gauge-class-50-development

You are entirely correct that there was feedback made on the digest, and I've just read back through that thread but it appears that nearly all of the issues raised have still been carried through to the EP/Livery samples. I don't believe Dapol showcased any further CADs after the announcement the model was coming out of abeyance but happy to be corrected on that. I wish I had paid more attention to the CADs when they were first shown, but a 50 wasn't high on my list of priorities then.

 

For what its worth, I have just sent Dapol directly my concerns over the model (in a very polite & constructive format I assure you!) so it's over to them now.

 

Tom.

Edited October 19, 2018 by TomE

[MGR Hooper!]

Its interesting that Dapols most accurate and successful models such as the class 68, western etc. all had much work done on them by Dapol Dave before he moved to pastures new, contributing and advising with many other successful projects such as pendolinos, LLCs class 15 as well other UK and Irish prototypes in additoon yo his own award winning products.

Dapol declaired they had scrapped all previous works (Dave's) on the class 142, class 50, class 59 etc. And restarted notably not restarting the class 68. So Are we only now seeing the results of the new design teams standards?

The CAD for the Class 68 was not redone. It started much later and much after the ex-Dapol employee left.

 

His tent at Dapol didn't go flawlessly. There's models from that era that also have quite a few errors.

 

You cannot attribute the success or failures on such a thing. Infact in his current endeavour he's got a Class 71 that has an error and a J94 as well.

 

So it has nothing to do with who is in charge.

[MGR Hooper!]

Quote any post on this thread that uses the kind of language in your second example?

 

Comparing an EP to the prototype it purports to represent and highlighting areas where there are issues or errors is not bashing, or being rude, or being hostile. It's using evidence to support observation.

 

Tom.

If I am giving an example of how I've personally seen people give feedback, it doesn't necessarily have to come from a certain topic.

 

I was merely showing you how a minor change in a statement can be interpreted so differently.

 

With regards to posts on this topic, I think it has already been spoken about on the previous page. I have no interest in bringing it up again.

 

And thank you for contacting Dapol personally. I have done the same highlighting your observations and passed in into two of their staff members personally.

 

As you say, it's now upto them. If they take feedback onboard then it's good, if they don't I don't see them making big losses on the product. It will only be the rivet counters who will decline a purchase.

[Steadfast]

Are any of the members here who are posting detailed paragraphs and images highlighting the errors actually taking the time and effort to do the same directly to Dapol via facebook or the Dapol Digest?

 

I'm not seeing any of these latest detailed posts anywhere on Dapol's Forums and/or facebook?

 

If no one wants to do that and wants to reserve their posts specifically for rmweb and moan about the errors, I'll be happy to compile a list of errors and forward it to some of the Dapol staff. I'm extremely happy to volunteer and as stated before compile a list of errors and forward them onto a member of the Dapol team. Please PM me with suitable notes and images and I shall format it and pass it on.

 

I agree the model has errors, personally it doesn't bother me because I recognize it as a Class 50, I'm not a rivet counter and I'm happy with something that looks like one and runs well. However people are entitled to their opinions and it's nice if it is put forth politely instead of bashing a brand. It's better to atleast forward your concerns to Dapol and live with the fact that you have than to sit and moan and bash all day long. If you make an effort and pass on your feedback to the right places, atleast you know you've done your part. Whether Dapol take your feedback or not and work on it is a different story.

 

So please, if you have some genuine feedback to give Dapol and if you just don't want to make an effort and pass it on and if you prefer bashing them here and showing off your knowledge, then please drop me a PM and I shall go the last mile and pass it onto Dapol.

One presumes if we're seeing decorated samples then the loco tooling is past the point of no return so it's a bit late in the process now

 

I think personally the issues being discussed are beyond rivet counting, here we're talking large issues affecting the character of the model. Modelling in the smart scales is often more about impressionism than physical individual details, but the character needs to be right to create that illusion. The 68 set Dapol's bar rather high. The JNA and MJA wagons had a couple of minor errors, whilst one or two corrections may have made a finer product, the majority won't be noticed, even up close, and perhaps those could be seen as rivet counting, but the overall character is there.

Far too often we hear "but it's better than what we had before", which is often true, but I don't think you'd hear many 4mm modellers settling for that. So why should we?

 

Jo

[Chris M]

Reality is that Dapol are unlikely to spend another £100k or so to re-tool the body. We have what we have. The perfectionist may decide not to buy it but the rest of us will. I do think those that are experts on this forum should offer their services to Dapol should they ever decide to took up for another totally new N gauge loco.

[Steadfast]

Perhaps people already have spoken to Dapol about other ongoing projects and made themselves known?

 

Jo

[Tricky-CRS]

Its interesting that Dapols most accurate and successful models such as the class 68, western etc. all had much work done on them by Dapol Dave before he moved to pastures new, contributing and advising with many other successful projects such as pendolinos, LLCs class 15 as well other UK and Irish prototypes in additoon yo his own award winning products.

Dapol declaired they had scrapped all previous works (Dave's) on the class 142, class 50, class 59 etc. And restarted notably not restarting the class 68. So Are we only now seeing the results of the new design teams standards?

Dave had no input on the class 68 it was announced after he left and scanned by the current Dapol team.

[Tricky-CRS]

It is my understanding that the CADs were checked by some experts who should no the subject very well.

 

I will admit that I have been fervent in my comments about the curve, but if I have been rude I apologise, I say this as some of the later posters are getting out of hand. Other items pointed out I have less of a view, photographs can be cruel and it may be limits in model engineering, but some may be mistakes from Dapol.

 

I think on balance it is light years ahead of the Farish version so I am happy with the 3 I have on order. It will be interesting to see how the production models turn up as the painted samples did have issues in production.

[TomE]

Dave had no input on the class 68 it was announced after he left and scanned by the current Dapol team.

The original post at the start of this thread way back in 2013 was made by Dave, as were serveral subsequent posts with more CADs, so certainly in the early days he was involved.

 

I believe Dapol later stated after Dave left that the CADs were being reviewed, but several of the areas of concern raised about the EP seem to be present in these early CADs also, notably the headcode box, so whether they were actually reviewed and by whom isn’t clear.

 

I certainly do agree that this model is light years away from the old Farish model, which is why it will be lapped up by the wider market regardless of any issues and what we say here. And let’s face it, Dapol are by no means the first to struggle with this classes complex curves and shapes, it seems to challenge everyone who’s had a crack at it!

 

Tom.

[Tricky-CRS]

The original post at the start of this thread way back in 2013 was made by Dave, as were serveral subsequent posts with more CADs, so certainly in the early days he was involved.

 

I believe Dapol later stated after Dave left that the CADs were being reviewed, but several of the areas of concern raised about the EP seem to be present in these early CADs also, notably the headcode box, so whether they were actually reviewed and by whom isn’t clear.

 

I certainly do agree that this model is light years away from the old Farish model, which is why it will be lapped up by the wider market regardless of any issues and what we say here. And let’s face it, Dapol are by no means the first to struggle with this classes complex curves and shapes, it seems to challenge everyone who’s had a crack at it!

 

Tom.

Tom I was referring to the Class 68 that Dave had no input into that is in the post I quoted, he most definitely did start the class 50. I amongst numerous others no doubt asked him to do the 50 several times.

[TomE]

Tom I was referring to the Class 68 that Dave had no input into that is in the post I quoted, he most definitely did start the class 50. I amongst numerous others no doubt asked him to do the 50 several times.

So you were, my apologies!

 

Tom.

[Chris M]

I agree Ropley is exceptional and exquisite modelling. This level can only be achieved by very careful and detailed study of the real thing.

[TomE]

Dapol say Feb/March next year for the 50, despite other info elsewhere suggesting December. Production affected by the knock on effects of the Typhoon a little while ago which resulted in the loss of some of the paint masks.

 

Tom.

[grahame]

Dapol say Feb/March next year for the 50, despite other info elsewhere suggesting December. Production affected by the knock on effects of the Typhoon a little while ago which resulted in the loss of some of the paint masks.

Tom.

A little unfortunate. But doesn't that push it in to the usual effects of the Chinese New Year hiatus?

 

G

[njee20]

Not if it's to be delivered by then - it'll need to leave the factory before the end of January to hit those deadlines. I agree though that further slippage will definitely be into CNY territory.

[grahame]

CNY for 2019 is nearly two weeks earlier than 2018 with the day falling on the 5th and the festival extending to the 19th. The official holiday is from the 4th to the 10th so they will need to get things produced, packed and shipped before the end of Jan.

 

G.

[chrisd]

Had the pleasure of seeing the painted examples of the 50 on Dapols stand at Warley today. Personally, I am very pleased to have ordered one of these, even if it’s stretching my modelling period to its extreme. It really captures the look for me. And that’s what N is all about for me. It’s about the overall impression, rather than the fine detail. Thank you Dapol.

[woodenhead]

Forget the close up pics we had recently, when you see them in the flesh there is no doubt these are excellent interpretations of the class.

 

I also forgot just how small the N gauge Terrier was too.

[jamespetts]

I managed to get a picture of one not behind glass at Warley this afternoon:

 

Dapol class 50 sample by James Petts, on Flickr

[woodenhead]

That's a nice angle, we have to remember the true size of the model, these look seriously good

[oreamnos]

I received (and I suspect many did, too) an update from what was formerly a Liverpool located box-shifter that the Dapol 50s are now expected March/April, 2019.  This is good for me since I'm short of funds right now, but maybe not so good for others...

 

Matt

[chrisd]

Similar information direct from Dapol at Warley. Expect completion end January/beginning February. Add 6-8 weeks for delivery.