Kernow Beattie Well Tank Announcement

[DJM Dave]

Hi Ian,

 

I don't know of a feedback controller that will work perfectly well with a corelessmotor I'm afraid.

 

I used to like feedback controllers for my layout and swore by comp speed ones on previous layouts.

 

However I think times have changed almost in the way that electronic track 'cleaners' aren't really cleaners, but can do undesirable things to electronics and corelessmotor motors, that feedback may not be the controller of future times.

 

Others will have their opinions and I'd be very glad to hear them here.

Cheers

Dave

[Ian Hargrave]

Thanks for clearing that up Dave.Worth airing the matter here before anybody's loco comes to grief,I think.I retired my feedback years back when I bought a model with a Faulhaber motor and was strongly advised not to run it with my existing one.

[railroadbill]

Thanks for clearing that up Dave.Worth airing the matter here before anybody's loco comes to grief,I think.I retired my feedback years back when I bought a model with a Faulhaber motor and was strongly advised not to run it with my existing one.

I had something similar years ago with using an RG4 motor, however that was ok with the non-feedback controller I had (still use, actually, H&M commander). So that coreless motor stopped me getting any more "sophisticated"  controllers.

 

The BWT has been running for over 8 hours now without any problems - on DC with no feedback.

 

One related issue is with dcc in that some chips use feedback which I think can be switched off with the appropriate cv setting, but I've never done it. Is that likely to be a problem with coreless motors on dcc?

Edited April 18, 2015 by railroadbill

[brigo]

The problem with feedback and coreless motors is that most feedback controllers used the relatively slow "Mains" frequency of 50Hz to generate the pulses applied to the motor. A coreless motor can respond to these pulses literally speeding up and down in sympathy with the pulses. They also generate a higher back EMF voltage compared to a "normal" motor which most feedback controllers cannot cope with. I believe the Pendon controller used a higher frequency of pulses and also had a switchable setting to allow for the higher back EMF of coreless motors. For DCC either the feedback can be switched off altogether or the pulse frequency can be increased in the CV's to allow for coreless motors.

 

If the coreless motor is so good is there any possibility of supplying them as a separate item for the kit or re-motoring market, ie get an extra 100 or so added on to an order for locos ?

 

Brian G.

[railroadbill]

The problem with feedback and coreless motors is that most feedback controllers used the relatively slow "Mains" frequency of 50Hz to generate the pulses applied to the motor. A coreless motor can respond to these pulses literally speeding up and down in sympathy with the pulses. They also generate a higher back EMF voltage compared to a "normal" motor which most feedback controllers cannot cope with. I believe the Pendon controller used a higher frequency of pulses and also had a switchable setting to allow for the higher back EMF of coreless motors. For DCC either the feedback can be switched off altogether or the pulse frequency can be increased in the CV's to allow for coreless motors.

 

If the coreless motor is so good is there any possibility of supplying them as a separate item for the kit or re-motoring market, ie get an extra 100 or so added on to an order for locos ?

 

Brian G.

Hi Brian,

I've got a number of dcc chipped locos (the layout is run as either   dc or dcc depending on which controllers are plugged in and what era of locos I want to run) and looking at the instruction sheets a Bachmann 553 chip is 31.25 Khz,  557 21 pin is 15.6 Khz, Loksound V4 21 pin sound decoder 32 Khz. All these use back emf which can be adjusted/switched off.

 

Are these types ok for coreless motors?

 

Bill

[brigo]

Hi Brian,

I've got a number of dcc chipped locos (the layout is run as either   dc or dcc depending on which controllers are plugged in and what era of locos I want to run) and looking at the instruction sheets a Bachmann 553 chip is 31.25 Khz,  557 21 pin is 15.6 Khz, Loksound V4 21 pin sound decoder 32 Khz. All these use back emf which can be adjusted/switched off.

 

Are these types ok for coreless motors?

 

Bill

Hi Bill,

 

Not having used any of the decoders you mention, I only have experience of Lenz and Zimo, you are looking for frequencies in KHz rather than Hz. Lenz use around 23 KHz which has worked OK for me.

 

Brian G.

[railroadbill]

Hi Bill,

 

Not having used any of the decoders you mention, I only have experience of Lenz and Zimo, you are looking for frequencies in KHz rather than Hz. Lenz use around 23 KHz which has worked OK for me.

 

Brian G.

Thanks Brian for useful explanation. Since the loksound and 553 chips are over 30 kHz (and the current 557 one is nearly 20 kHz) they should work ok with coreless motors then.

So low frequency feedback controller output no, but high frequency chip output yes.

Cheers

Bill

Edited April 20, 2015 by railroadbill

[Richard Lee]

However I think times have changed almost in the way that electronic track 'cleaners' aren't really cleaners, but can do undesirable things to electronics and corelessmotor motors, that feedback may not be the controller of future times.

Sounds as if it might be best for me to move my Gaugemaster electronic track cleaner from the main layout onto the small layout (which is Hornby Terriers only for motive power) when my O2 comes.

[DJM Dave]

Sounds as if it might be best for me to move my Gaugemaster electronic track cleaner from the main layout onto the small layout (which is Hornby Terriers only for motive power) when my O2 comes.

Hi mate,

 

There may be others that can steer you here, regarding the good and bad of these 'cleaners', however as a modeller myself I've known my wheels to pit on the tread due to these items, and electronics to disrupt. I swore I'd never use one again about 15 years ago and providing I kept my track clean and loco wheels dirt free I havnt had any problems.

 

Cheers

Dave

 

Again edited for fat finger disease and IOS 8.3 sorry :-((((

[Les1952]

goods and bass?

 

Fat finger disease again?

 

Les

[mikesndbs]

Hi, seen a review saying the coupling rods are plastic and the boiler has a big old mould line on it?

 

 

There seems to be a number of issues with this one at least, was seriously thinking of getting one but feel very put off by these observations?

 

Is this just this model?

[DJM Dave]

Hi, seen a review saying the coupling rods are plastic and the boiler has a big old mould line on it?

 

 

There seems to be a number of issues with this one at least, was seriously thinking of getting one but feel very put off by these observations?

 

Is this just this model?

Can't say I think much of the review to be honest!

[mikesndbs]

Can't say I think much of the review to be honest!

 

LOL Dave, so if I save up and buy one will it be different to his one?

[bgman]

Can't say I think much of the review to be honest!

Seems to be far too much contradiction in the review and left me very confused in places to be honest.

Oh! And by the way, Bodmin isn't a long way down south, it's a long way down West !

[mikesndbs]

Seems to be far too much contradiction in the review and left me very confused in places to be honest.

Oh! And by the way, Bodmin isn't a long way down south, it's a long way down West !

 

Still one to save up for then

[DJM Dave]

LOL Dave, so if I save up and buy one will it be different to his one?

Well I'm all for being subjective in reviews, but I'd make sure I researched the model first.

 

Is it Dapol or DJM for starters?

Plastic con rods?

Business card?

Worth £100?

 

Nice box though ;-)

[S.A.C Martin]

Just watched the video. I personally am glad to see an open and honest review and whilst I disagree with some points in it, I'm left with a number of fair and sensible questions off the back of it. Here's how I saw the review's points, in the interests of balance.

 

1. It states "model of the year" on the side. Well, that was the Dapol Well Tank that won that award, wasn't it?

 

This one has been made through DJ Models and Kernow.

 

Might be being a bit pedantic, but if there's been changes to the model - whether internally or externally - since that award winning release, then is it actually the same award winning model - and if it was under the Dapol brand in the first instance where it won the award, is it reasonable or fair to put that on the box? Dapol were given the award for the model, as I recall, not DJ Models or Kernow?

 

2. The question of "down south" - well since the reviewer mentions he is in the far north of the country, the Bodmin and Wenford Railway is certainly south of his location (and yes, west too). So he's not wrong in stating it's south.

 

3. The business card. Nowhere on the exterior of the box does it say "DJ Models". The reviewer is unaware that DJ models has manufactured this model for Kernow, so is surprised to find a business card in the box for this manufacturer.

 

That seems fair and logical to me. How would he - or anyone - know that the model has changed manufacturer purely by looking at the outside of the box? Particularly if he is not an RMweb member (which, outside of sporadic updates in the model railway press, is the only way you'd know that the Beattie Well Tank has changed manufacturer) and given DJ Models isn't shown anyone on the outer packaging.

 

4. Instructions - reviewer praises them. Fair play to him - and I agree, looking from the outside in, they look very well designed and clear. Like the parts list.

 

5. Lack of couplings - reviewer mentions he hasn't got any of the aesthetic metal couplings in the box. That's an oversight on a bought model. Missing part. Fair enough criticism surely?

 

6. Praises the research portion of the history section in the model.

 

7. Praises the exploded diagram and parts list.

 

8. Praises the fire iron extras.

 

9. Praises the inclusion of the white lamp discs.

 

10. Calls the model "beautiful" a number of times.

 

11. "Amazing detail in the cab", "Rivets everywhere".

 

12. Praises the smokebox door design, with the magnets. I like that too and I liked it on the original model.

 

13. Praises the printing of the numerals and text on the model.

 

14. Doesn't like the finish. Says it looks "plasticky". I have to agree, doesn't look painted but just the coloured black plastic. For balance, the reviewer says "you don't notice it much".

 

15. Criticises the mould line on the top of the boiler. Says it's a minor fault but that it bothers him. Fair enough.

 

16. Extra details on boiler - all plastic. Criticises this as he states that for £100, some of these should be metal. This criticism has been made elsewhere on other manufacturer's models including that of Hornby's Star and Heavy Tanks.

 

17. He states the coupling rods are plastic and are a shiny silver. He shows several closeups. They don't look like metal to me from looking at the video.

 

18. Praises separately fitted handrails, guard irons and similar. 

 

19. Praises the fact the lamp brackets and lamp head code discs work.

 

20. Shows a picture of the model not being level on a flat surface. Explains what the problem is - axle bearing not put in properly. Explains how to fix problem. 

 

21. Explains the brake rigging is fragile - managed to break a portion of it when taking the model apart to fix point 20. However states it was an easy fix.

 

He then shows a number of bits of footage showing the model in motion.

 

Mr Simpson's review seems quite balanced and fair to me. He's honest, goes into a lot of detail about what he likes about the model, and shows the model from all angles and praises a number of things about it.

 

The only major point of contention seems to be whether the coupling and piston rods are plastic or not. A simple clarification by the manufacturer would address that directly.

 

So Mr Jones - what material are the coupling and piston rods made out of?

 

Otherwise not sure why others are so dismissive. It's a much more informative review than the vast majority of online reviews. Isn't that we want - a balanced and honest appraisal of a model?

[DJM Dave]

Just watched the video. I personally am glad to see an open and honest review and whilst I disagree with some points in it, I'm left with a number of fair and sensible questions off the back of it. Here's how I saw the review's points, in the interests of balance.

 

1. It states "model of the year" on the side. Well, that was the Dapol Well Tank that won that award, wasn't it?

 

This one has been made through DJ Models and Kernow.

 

Might be being a bit pedantic, but if there's been changes to the model - whether internally or externally - since that award winning release, then is it actually the same award winning model - and if it was under the Dapol brand in the first instance where it won the award, is it reasonable or fair to put that on the box? Dapol were given the award for the model, as I recall, not DJ Models or Kernow?

 

2. The question of "down south" - well since the reviewer mentions he is in the far north of the country, the Bodmin and Wenford Railway is certainly south of his location (and yes, west too). So he's not wrong in stating it's south.

 

3. The business card. Nowhere on the exterior of the box does it say "DJ Models". The reviewer is unaware that DJ models has manufactured this model for Kernow, so is surprised to find a business card in the box for this manufacturer.

 

That seems fair and logical to me. How would he - or anyone - know that the model has changed manufacturer purely by looking at the outside of the box? Particularly if he is not an RMweb member (which, outside of sporadic updates in the model railway press, is the only way you'd know that the Beattie Well Tank has changed manufacturer) and given DJ Models isn't shown anyone on the outer packaging.

 

4. Instructions - reviewer praises them. Fair play to him - and I agree, looking from the outside in, they look very well designed and clear. Like the parts list.

 

5. Lack of couplings - reviewer mentions he hasn't got any of the aesthetic metal couplings in the box. That's an oversight on a bought model. Missing part. Fair enough criticism surely?

 

6. Praises the research portion of the history section in the model.

 

7. Praises the exploded diagram and parts list.

 

8. Praises the fire iron extras.

 

9. Praises the inclusion of the white lamp discs.

 

10. Calls the model "beautiful" a number of times.

 

11. "Amazing detail in the cab", "Rivets everywhere".

 

12. Praises the smokebox door design, with the magnets. I like that too and I liked it on the original model.

 

13. Praises the printing of the numerals and text on the model.

 

14. Doesn't like the finish. Says it looks "plasticky". I have to agree, doesn't look painted but just the coloured black plastic. For balance, the reviewer says "you don't notice it much".

 

15. Criticises the mould line on the top of the boiler. Says it's a minor fault but that it bothers him. Fair enough.

 

16. Extra details on boiler - all plastic. Criticises this as he states that for £100, some of these should be metal. This criticism has been made elsewhere on other manufacturer's models including that of Hornby's Star and Heavy Tanks.

 

17. He states the coupling rods are plastic and are a shiny silver. He shows several closeups. They don't look like metal to me from looking at the video.

 

18. Praises separately fitted handrails, guard irons and similar.

 

19. Praises the fact the lamp brackets and lamp head code discs work.

 

20. Shows a picture of the model not being level on a flat surface. Explains what the problem is - axle bearing not put in properly. Explains how to fix problem.

 

21. Explains the brake rigging is fragile - managed to break a portion of it when taking the model apart to fix point 20. However states it was an easy fix.

 

He then shows a number of bits of footage showing the model in motion.

 

Mr Simpson's review seems quite balanced and fair to me. He's honest, goes into a lot of detail about what he likes about the model, and shows the model from all angles and praises a number of things about it.

 

The only major point of contention seems to be whether the coupling and piston rods are plastic or not. A simple clarification by the manufacturer would address that directly.

 

So Mr Jones - what material are the coupling and piston rods made out of?

 

Otherwise not sure why others are so dismissive. It's a much more informative review than the vast majority of online reviews. Isn't that we want - a balanced and honest appraisal of a model?

Hi,

 

It's actually a Kernow model, commissioned by Kernow, paid for by Kernow so as it's their IP, I would venture to suggest that the award is theirs, not mine, not my former company's. As such they can put what they like on the box. If you have an issue with that please let Kernow know. I'm sure they will be glad to hear your opinion.

 

The card isn't a business card at all. It says "this model has been personally checked and tested by David Jones of DJModels"

There is also some warranty instructions on the reverse.

 

The spare con rods I have at home are metal, and from memory ( I'm away at the moment so apologies if I report this in accurately) the piston rod is plastic.

 

I suppose, if anything, I'm guilty of not watching the whole review. ( was watching it in a costa on their free wifi) at the time.

However what I saw wasn't the most fluid and researched review I've seen.

And, if he'd have done a little research, he would have known the manufacturer very easily. It's not as though it's not been public knowledge for the last year or so is it?

 

As for the price, I think this is subjective as I watch models creep past the £200 and £300 barrier

[mikesndbs]

Sorry to see this seems to have caused upset  I think we need to cut the reviewer some slack also, he is only about 17 or 18 and does represent a very large customer base indeed.

We can't all have super dooper room filling layouts and a big percentage of people have 2 rad curves on a small railway in the corner of the room.

Their viewpoint and cash is no more or less relevant than anyone elses.

 

Neither should the general modeling community be expected to be experts, or understand the various manufacturing issues.

No, most of us pay our money and expect what it says on the box.

 

If they are metal (as i'd expect) coupling rods then great I'll still be getting one in time.

Don't like the seam either but to have a classic loco like that I think I can ignore it.

 

Hope this sets out my position anyway. Sorry for any upset.

[Brinkly]

Can't say I think much of the review to be honest!

He's not too go on history! No kidding mate, even my 7 and 8 year olds know that 1880 was part of the Victorian Period!

 

Frankly I would take very little notice of this review. Look at the alternatives, Falcon Brassworks kit, with rivets in the wrong place on the splashers and a sod to build. I have all three with motors and three without and am very happy with them. Yes they are £100, but who would have thought we would have had an RTR Beattie Well tank of this quality! Yes you can improve it, that is called modelling, not buying!

 

We had one of my well tanks with 15-18 wagons trundling round. Add a bit of led inside (if it will fit), or add brass bearings to your rolling stock and it will haul a lot more.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

[roundhouse]

I haven't watched the review yet but I would normally read or watch a few reviews to try and get a balanced point of view, no disrespect to any reviewers.

 

I have three of the original batch of well tanks. They have metal coupling rods.

 

All are beautiful locos. All run fine although one did have a broken wire / dry joint fault appear last time I went to run it. Takes a little care to get the body off but it's all back together running well.

 

All three have been weathered so any plastic look (not that I noticed any) has well and truly disappeared. All now fitted with NEM Kadees and 6 pin decoders.

 

The brass kit that I acquired second hand is highly likely to remain a kit!!!

[S.A.C Martin]

Hi,

 

Good afternoon Dave. Thank you for responding so promptly.

 

It's actually a Kernow model, commissioned by Kernow, paid for by Kernow so as it's their IP, I would venture to suggest that the award is theirs, not mine, not my former company's. As such they can put what they like on the box. If you have an issue with that please let Kernow know. I'm sure they will be glad to hear your opinion.

 

 

Okay - but the link here says it's a "Kernow/Dapol" model. In fact the exact paragraph states:

 

Dapol increased its profile in 2011 with several significant products including the Model Rail Sentinel 4wVBT and LMS 10000/01 for Hattons - which emerged as winner in the Diesel/Electric category ahead of Dapols own Class 22. Significantly it also won the steam category for Kernow Model Rail Centre's Beattie 2-4-0WT, the third year in a row in which a locomotive with pre-Grouping origins has taken that title.

 

I think that's a fair summation of events.

 

The card isn't a business cad at all. It says "this model has been personally checked and tested by David Jones of DJModels"

There is also some warranty instructions on the reverse.

 

Fair enough, my apologies. I am going off the review made. However the point about who has manufactured the model still stands: just having that card in the box would confuse someone not clued up on the well tank's origins.

 

The card itself is also business card sized and shaped so perhaps the reviewer made an assumption he should not have done based on societal practice.

 

The spare con rods I have at home are metal, and from memory ( I'm away at the moment so apologies if I report this in accurately) the piston rod is plastic.

 

That's fine and I accept that - that looks to be the case from the video now I look at it a second time.

 

I suppose, if anything, I'm guilty of not watching the whole review. ( was watching it in a costa on their free wifi) at the time.

 

Getting both sides of the story here and getting a reasonable response is key to getting a fair and balanced response.

 

If you've not watched the whole video, you'll have missed out on a lot of praise for the well tank. I personally think as far as reviews go this was better than some professional reviews produced because it got to the crux of the problems with his specific model and offered practical advice should anyone else have a problem with theirs in the manner he did. That, and though he had criticisms, he put them across in an apologetic manner. 

 

However what I saw wasn't the most fluid and researched review I've seen.

 

 

Nobody's perfect: but I think I will agree to disagree on your summation. I thought it to be a very fair practical review which actually gave a lot of a praise to the product in question.

 

And, if he'd have done a little research, he would have known the manufacturer very easily. It's not as though it's not been public knowledge for the last year or so is it?

 

You seem to assume that he'd be aware of DJ Models. As I say, aside from the updates on here and sporadically in the railway magazines, DJ Models is not a household name outside of here so perhaps it's a case of not being aware he had to look for DJ Models. He seems to be aware of Dapol and assumed throughout that it was Dapol made. With nothing on the box indicating it was manufactured by DJ Models and probably nothing at the Bodmin and Wenford Railway indicating it either, how could have have known to look for DJ Models?

 

As for the price, I think this is subjective as I watch models creep past the £200 and £300 barrier

 

Absolutely agree it's subjective. 

 

The one thing I am getting from the negativity on here to this review is that for some, any criticism of a model is akin to dropping a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima.

 

I am astonished by the reaction to a video where the appraisal of the model is, in the main and more than broadly speaking, gushingly positive for the Beattie Well Tank with a number of well observed criticisms which are put in an apologetic fashion. I must ask - because it feels a fair question to ask - did you all watch the video all the way? I watched all 27 minutes of it. I thought the reviewer did a good and fair job and more power to his elbow.

[S.A.C Martin]

He's not too go on history! No kidding mate, even my 7 and 8 year olds know that 1880 was part of the Victorian Period!

 

Frankly I would take very little notice of this review. Look at the alternatives, Falcon Brassworks kit, with rivets in the wrong place on the splashers and a sod to build. I have all three with motors and three without and am very happy with them. Yes they are £100, but who would have thought we would have had an RTR Beattie Well tank of this quality! Yes you can improve it, that is called modelling, not buying!

 

We had one of my well tanks with 15-18 wagons trundling round. Add a bit of led inside (if it will fit), or add brass bearings to your rolling stock and it will haul a lot more.

 

Regards,

 

Nick.

 

Nick - not everyone is a history buff, much in the same way that not everyone is a modeller. The reviewer was honest enough to say that and it takes guts to admit a flaw, not least on camera. He praised the historical notes provided with the model in his review, so at least he provided some balance to his own (and freely admitted) lack of knowledge in that area.

 

He's a young modeller and everyone starts somewhere. The problem is, looking at this subjectively for prices, he's perhaps got his own opinions on the price based on other models he has in his collection. That's reasonable: everyone has differences of opinion on price. Kit building doesn't come into it because he didn't mention it at all. It was a general observation, looking specifically at this model, probably with an eye on other models he has bought previously. 

 

It's not as if he's a young Electric Nose gents. He's provided a reasonable and balanced review - perhaps some reasonable and balanced observations would be fair to the lad to help him improve, rather than condemning him outright just because his opinion doesn't line up with your own.

[jonny777]

The Railtour seems to have been 2nd Dec '62.

 

So between mid-Sept and early-Dec all 3 locos were at Eastleigh being "examined"? I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a great switch-a-roo of parts to ensure that the best 2 locos was provided for the Railtour and, in 587's case, into preservation.

 

All we need know is a selection of photos from Eastleigh in the autumn of '62...

 

 

A selection I cannot do, but I can do one at Eastleigh in Sep 1962  -  

 

 

 

[Brinkly]

Nick - not everyone is a history buff, much in the same way that not everyone is a modeller. The reviewer was honest enough to say that and it takes guts to admit a flaw, not least on camera. He praised the historical notes provided with the model in his review, so at least he provided some balance to his own (and freely admitted) lack of knowledge in that area.

 

He's a young modeller and everyone starts somewhere. The problem is, looking at this subjectively for prices, he's perhaps got his own opinions on the price based on other models he has in his collection. That's reasonable: everyone has differences of opinion on price. Kit building doesn't come into it because he didn't mention it at all. It was a general observation, looking specifically at this model, probably with an eye on other models he has bought previously. 

 

It's not as if he's a young Electric Nose gents. He's provided a reasonable and balanced review - perhaps some reasonable and balanced observations would be fair to the lad to help him improve, rather than condemning him outright just because his opinion doesn't line up with your own.

 

I don't want to start a massive debate over this, but everyone is entitled to their opinion and it is great that someone young is joining the hobby. I'm not being harsh, or horrid, but he is inexperienced, yes he makes good points and yes he makes less well informed comments. My advice if you want a serious review, read BRM's, Hornby's or Model Rail's. They are people who do it for a living. Granted they won't be able to provide the long term view, bit like the year long test that What Car do, but they haven't failed most of us yet.

 

As for being a history buff, I would say that knowing when the key periods of British history is not being a 'history buff', that is basic knowledge. A history buff is someone who knows how many Prime Ministers served Queen Victoria!  (10 UK, more if you count dominions and if you count second, or in some cases third [or forth] separate terms in office!)

 

Kind regards,

 

Nick.

 

(Edit for typo)

Edited June 9, 2015 by Brinkly