Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge GWR Dean Goods

[bertiedog]

Of slight concern is the model being reviewed by a major magazine, (I have not seen the full article, only the video), and them failing to spot the faults in details or colour, Ho Hum, Tis ever the way.........

[amdaley]

Of slight concern is the model being reviewed by a major magazine, (I have not seen the full article, only the video), and them failing to spot the faults in details or colour, Ho Hum, Tis ever the way.........

 

If I needed a review of a model I wouldn't be looking in a magazine.

I'd be looking somewhere like this forum or similar 

[No Decorum]

An early example of a superior technology being ousted by an inferior one with more muscle

When you think of the cost of converting standard gauge to broad, such as acquiring land, excavating cuttings, enlarging embankments, expanding tunnels and so on, compared to the cost of just moving one rail over a bit, it’s little wonder that broad gauge was converted to standard rather than the other way around. Derailed steam locomotives falling over was, I suppose, a hidden cost .

[Edwardian]

I still think Betamax was a better system ....

[Dunsignalling]

I still think Betamax was a better system ....

The even-more forgotten Philips 2000 system was supposedly the absolute dogs whatsits of tape based [home] video recording. 

 

However, both it and Betamax did more and better than the market at the time thought it needed and prices reflected those abilities.

 

VHS was simply "good enough" and did everything the average punter wanted for a bit less cash. Once it became the de facto industry standard it was game over for the other, better, formats.

 

Yes, there is a direct parallel to be drawn with the Battle of the Gauges - though, in that case, the GWR had allowed BG technology to stagnate long enough for the capability of Standard Gauge railways to catch up - after that cost and convenience came to the fore and the outcome was inevitable. 

 

Nowadays, we are used to seeing "must have" devices being chosen on the basis of facilities that many purchasers will seldom, if ever, actually use.

 

The days when Video Tape systems were fighting it out seem charmingly innocent in hindsight........

 

John

Edited June 13, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[BG John]

When you think of the cost of converting standard gauge to broad, such as acquiring land, excavating cuttings, enlarging embankments, expanding tunnels and so on, compared to the cost of just moving one rail over a bit, it’s little wonder that broad gauge was converted to standard rather than the other way around. Derailed steam locomotives falling over was, I suppose, a hidden cost .

 

I still think Betamax was a better system ....

Fortunately I chose the inferior system for my first video recorder, so didn't have the cost of replacing a perfectly good Betamax or Video 2000. Some very big holes would have needed to be dug at landfill sites if VHS had lost out! And think of all the factories that would have had to switch production too. Each of these modern technology changes imposes huge costs, but they're spread over lots of companies and individuals, rather than a relatively small number of companies that a one off gauge change would have involved.

 

Anyone want an S-VHS recorder? I don't seem to have a use for it any more!

[melmerby]

 

 

Anyone want an S-VHS recorder? I don't seem to have a use for it any more!

I've just dismantled mine for it's motors and some components!

 

I originally had a Philips VCR (not V 2000) which was better than a VHS before VHS was invented!

I then went to V2000 as I couldn't see the point of going backwards, picture wise and followed that with a S-VHS when V2000 was dumped by the manufacturers

At one point I had both V2000 and S-VHS as well as a S-VHSc camcorder.

 

If the best technology defines sales VHS would have been a failure, however Matsushita persuaded most of the rental companies to take VHS and the fate of the others were sealed.

The rental customers just wanted a video recorder and weren't too bothered about it's ultimate qualities.

The original piano key type JVC VHS recorders were way over £400 so most were rented, however as more and more brands entered the market the price started to fall and more VHS were bought.

VHS was a case of inventing something that was inferior then using corporate muscle to prove all the competition were wrong!

 

At one point the sales market for VHS was quite low and V2000 and Betamax outsold them however these were dwarfed by the, at the time, much much bigger rental market where VHS was way out in front.

 

Incidentally when I was at work (where we worked with technology) hardly anybody had a VHS, most had V2000 with some with Betamax. Most were purchased.

 

V2000 was definitely the best picture of the three systems and VHS worst. The S-VHS only brought the picture quality, belatedly, up to that of the much earlier Philps VCR

 

Keith

Edited June 12, 2016 by melmerby

[gismorail]

It won't be long before CD's go the same way as VHS Betamax and Phillips 

[lofty1966]

And what about those Dean Goods , eh?

[BG John]

And what about those Dean Goods , eh?

I think we're coming to the conclusion that we're having a bit of inferior technology foisted on us, although in this case it's an improvement on the previous version in some ways, but it kills the market for any potential perfect model.

[No Decorum]

…it kills the market for any potential perfect model.

 This is one of the most annoying things about dud models and it happens all the time. The list is quite long.

[Edwardian]

 This is one of the most annoying things about dud models and it happens all the time. The list is quite long.

 

Agree.  There is a danger here.  Look at the Terrier.  A new-tooled 4mm model comes out very high in the wish-list polls, but, so far, the crude and hopelessly inaccurate Dapol/Hornby offering has deterred any alternative.  Having said that, the Hornby J94 has not deterred DJH, but then, this was a modern locomotive and even the most popular and useful pre-Group designs will get one shot at best in a given generation.  Witness no new 4300 or J72 as yet.  The industry has its work cut out re-tooling models to out of date standards.  New models need to meet present day demands for accuracy and quality.  We cannot afford backward steps.

 

It is very important, not just now, but for people entering the hobby thirty years from now, for Oxford to get this right.  Come on Oxford, show us you can do it!

[The Stationmaster]

When you think of the cost of converting standard gauge to broad, such as acquiring land, excavating cuttings, enlarging embankments, expanding tunnels and so on, compared to the cost of just moving one rail over a bit, it’s little wonder that broad gauge was converted to standard rather than the other way around. Derailed steam locomotives falling over was, I suppose, a hidden cost .

 

I suppose an extra 4ft 7" width of land (for a double line) over the distance from London to Bristol might possibly make a  difference but not all that much in reality

I think we're coming to the conclusion that we're having a bit of inferior technology foisted on us, although in this case it's an improvement on the previous version in some ways, but it kills the market for any potential perfect model.

 

Absolutely true.  I think it is not so much of a problem with 'popular' big express engines such as the A4 or some diesel such as the Brush Type 4/Class 47 but it is a definite problem with the more esoteric types where mass demand is inevitably lower but production & development costs aren't.  A Dean Goods would no doubt be a quite good seller and the existing r-t-r model is no doubt sufficiently long in the tooth to make a new effort worthwhile but anything that comes  along will effectively kill the market for anybody else for a long time.

 

Regrettably we've had too many examples - a poor EM1 being one not so long back  A further problem is that if a company is concentrating on models aimed at the toyshop end of the market and low prices they are unlikely to be as concerned, or willing to spend time and money on research and extended development times in order to satisfy a more demanding market sector.  and if they find this sort of approach produces good sales figures they are hardly likely to change their approach so the 'neutralisation' of particular prototypes continues.

 

A great pity in my view that we should find things moving backwards but I doubt we can do anything to stop it short of boycotting the models which don't come up to scratch or achieve the standards we want.  But there are still plenty of folk around to whom (low) price is all but I can hardly envisage a peculiarly liveried Dean Goods ever acquiring the cachet, and EBay price levels, of Bachmann's SE&CR liveried Class C.

[coachmann]

The Dean Goods will present no problems to folk with modelling skills. The Oxford model looks to be a smooth runner and so it has potential. Some folk have alluded to a cast boiler. I don't know what the tools are like or how such things are cast, but if it is anything like casting white metal, then making a new firebox side pattern before releasing the model would be a simple move.

[Horsetan]

.....At one point the sales market for VHS was quite low and V2000 and Betamax outsold them however these were dwarfed by the, at the time, much much bigger rental market where VHS was way out in front.

 

Incidentally when I was at work (where we worked with technology) hardly anybody had a VHS, most had V2000 with some with Betamax. Most were purchased.

 

V2000 was definitely the best picture of the three systems and VHS worst. The S-VHS only brought the picture quality, belatedly, up to that of the much earlier Philps VCR

 

The other advantage that V2000 had was the double-sided video cassette.

 

Betamax, as far as I understood it, had better sound quality than either V2000 or VHS.

 

I still have a Sony VHS player. It's well into its second decade and still works.

[frobisher]

It won't be long before CD's go the same way as VHS Betamax and Phillips

To a certain extent they already have (very little music is actually bought these days on physical media) but I'd say not going away anytime soon. The disk size has endured to define that of DVDs and BluRay discs, and those devices will always be backwards compatible, plus you have a whole hump of cd players in cars that'll be there for the foreseeable future. We've already had our latest "Beta vs VHS" battle (back nearly ten years now...) with BluRay winning out over the technically superior HD-DVD (long list of reasons, though capacity wasn't one of them and wasn't relevant to BluRay either) for market share piggy backed off of the PlayStation 3.

[The Stationmaster]

The Dean Goods will present no problems to folk with modelling skills. The Oxford model looks to be a smooth runner and so it has potential. Some folk have alluded to a cast boiler. I don't know what the tools are like or how such things are cast, but if it is anything like casting white metal, then making a new firebox side pattern before releasing the model would be a simple move.

 

It's not so much the ability of the factory to do as the willingness of the UK customer to stand the costs of doing it and the delay in launching the model and the impact on cashflow.

 

If it does run well in mass production practice then it has something going for it and provided it has the capability of being altered I don't doubt that those with the right skills could alter it.  Judging by other models from China with metal components I think the material would be more akin to something like mazak rather than the sort of whitemetal we associate with kits made in the UK (but that is just an impression, nota firm piece of knowledge) thus the tooling would be different from the moulding process for softer metals.

[Edwardian]

Whereas I think the basic point is that both praise and condemnation would be premature, we will have to wait and see, I can at least contribute something of an update, which I feel is somewhat reassuring.

 

It would not be fair, I thought, to criticise, or adopt others' criticisms, without asking Mr Oxford himself to comment.  And he has, in a lengthy and cordial email.

 

First, you will be delighted to know that the reference on the website to "Deans Goods" should go.  Not that serious railway modellers are the slightest bit pedantic, but I thought they may as well get it right as not.

 

Second, Oxford say that the samples we have seen were first samples and unchecked, but that it appears from some of the subsequent discussion that it has been assumed these are final or approved samples and that magazines have given them full, in depth reviews, none of which is the case.

 

Third, the number plate modification was approved last week.

 

Fourth, the paint colours were something Oxford wanted to change, though they point out that lighting in some studios has affected the real colour quite significantly when viewed on screen.

 

Fifth, the handrails are all hand applied without an assembly jig as the samples are for for livery experiments, and not EP samples.   Oxford say they’ll aim to replicate the real thing.

 

Sixth, the moment you've all been waiting for, the firebox profile point, is, apparently, something that is new to my correspondent.  It has been passed to the Engineer to check.

 

Finally, and this could be very good news indeed, "the tooling suite has a number of variations built into to accommodate variants in the class from ‘as built’ to ‘withdrawal’".

 

As, I believe, the whole class was built under Dean, between1883 and 1899, so far as I am aware "as built" equals round-top firebox. 

 

So, my fingers are firmly crossed on this one.

 

Any other flaws and inaccuracies anyone has clocked but not told Oxford about?  I'm back to my books to make my own assessment.

[BG John]

All built with either S0, S2 or S4 boilers, so all originally round top fireboxes. Built between May 1883 and January 1899. It looks like the first few Belpaires were fitted in 1901, but some didn't get one until well into the 1920s.

 

I think it's worrying that pictures have been spread around that aren't the final version, without making that clear. Lack of information seems to be a problem with Oxford, and probably other companies too, but I haven't been following them so closely. Maybe a lot of what we've been discussing/criticising has been/will be fixed, but we don't know that. If what we've seen recently is still subject to significant changes, why don't they say that? I get the impression that they show pictures that will attract the uninformed collector/train set owner, who may well think "Oh, what a pretty olde worlde engine. I must have one", but ignore the smaller, but important number of people who actually care about the details being right, who will be put off buying one for themsleves, or will put others off buying.

[No Decorum]

Whereas I think the basic point is that both praise and condemnation would be premature, we will have to wait and see, I can at least contribute something of an update, which I feel is somewhat reassuring.

 

It would not be fair, I thought, to criticise, or adopt others' criticisms, without asking Mr Oxford himself to comment.  And he has, in a lengthy and cordial email.

 

First, you will be delighted to know that the reference on the website to "Deans Goods" should go.  Not that serious railway modellers are the slightest bit pedantic, but I thought they may as well get it right as not.

 

Second, Oxford say that the samples we have seen were first samples and unchecked, but that it appears from some of the subsequent discussion that it has been assumed these are final or approved samples and that magazines have given them full, in depth reviews, none of which is the case.

 

Third, the number plate modification was approved last week.

 

Fourth, the paint colours were something Oxford wanted to change, though they point out that lighting in some studios has affected the real colour quite significantly when viewed on screen.

 

Fifth, the handrails are all hand applied without an assembly jig as the samples are for for livery experiments, and not EP samples.   Oxford say they’ll aim to replicate the real thing.

 

Sixth, the moment you've all been waiting for, the firebox profile point, is, apparently, something that is new to my correspondent.  It has been passed to the Engineer to check.

 

Finally, and this could be very good news indeed, "the tooling suite has a number of variations built into to accommodate variants in the class from ‘as built’ to ‘withdrawal’".

 

As, I believe, the whole class was built under Dean, between1883 and 1899, so far as I am aware "as built" equals round-top firebox. 

 

So, my fingers are firmly crossed on this one.

 

Any other flaws and inaccuracies anyone has clocked but not told Oxford about?  I'm back to my books to make my own assessment.

Many thanks for doing what you did. If it results in Oxford correcting the firebox profile, you’ll have done us all, including Oxford, a great service. I have read some people’s view that a picture of a sample, subject to correction and very possibly battered by much handling, is misleading and should not be made public. If Oxford acts on what you’ve pointed out, it demonstrates the value of showing such samples, although, as BG John points out, it might be helpful to point out that it isn’t the final version.

[Hroth]

Whereas I think the basic point is that both praise and condemnation would be premature, we will have to wait and see, I can at least contribute something of an update, which I feel is somewhat reassuring.

 

It would not be fair, I thought, to criticise, or adopt others' criticisms, without asking Mr Oxford himself to comment.  And he has, in a lengthy and cordial email.

 

....

No point in repeating all your post!

 

Thanks for taking the trouble to make personal contact to raise all the queries that have been buzzing around here like bluebottles, with Oxford Rail themselves.  The responses you got are interesting and informative. The fact that the tooling suite is built to accommodate variants gives hope that the firebox profile issue can indeed be addressed, and the prompt nature of the response raises confidence that the Dean Goods will be rather better than some have feared!

 

Fingers crossed. etc. etc......

[BG John]

The problem with fixing some of the problems, and being able to do any version, is that having decided to carry on with my Mainline one, will what they release first actually be worth me buying? Or if I do, will they later bring out exactly what I wanted? I could end up with three Dean Goods if I'm not careful, and I don't really need one at all!

 

Thinking ahead to my next broad gauge layout, I wonder if they'll do an as built version that I could convert to P4, to encourage me to complicate the layout by making it mixed gauge!

[SDJR7F88]

Of slight concern is the model being reviewed by a major magazine, (I have not seen the full article, only the video), and them failing to spot the faults in details or colour, Ho Hum, Tis ever the way.........

From what I gather these are just hand painted Prototypes, which have been given the magazines to have a look and write an update on models progress. So I can understand why the livery maybe off or the number plate out of alignment. Maybe, just maybe Oxford have done this to see what us models can spot, so it maybe be correct (though of course this may not be the case). Either way it is nice to see a Company showing us and the Magazines progress on their latest projects.

I'm very much looking forward to the finished model either way 

[bertiedog]

To those who are not engineers the die cast process for Mazak zinc cast is quite different to white metal cast. The mould is usually tool steel, multi part, held together by hydraulic power, but able to come apart in sections, under the control of the machines hydraulic system.

 

 

The machine weighs several tons and the moulds are maintained at temperatures above the melting point of the metal, then reduced to release the moulding as it cools.

 

The tooling cools each time a cast is made, and re heats as it is re assembled for the next use.

 

These moulds are costly, up to millions each, but the costs are lower now as CNC machining has lowered the work required, and cheaper metals can be used for low number runs,

 

The advantage of pressure die casting is a clean finished item in one go, little second operation machining, little flash, less waste.

 

White metal cast is a simple mould filled with molten metal, the mould is rubber, and the whole process is based on art casting, one offs, or low production numbers.

 

The Chinese are good at making moulds for the pressure die casting processes, and succeeded in bringing the costs down to very low levels, compared to western makers.

 

But a new mould for the boiler would still be a costly option, but I suspect that the existing one could be modified to alter the shape.

 

At least it seems that other versions will be made, and a round top is feasible, but Oxford are completely silent to the buyers at present. I did try to contact them about his but no replies so far.

 

Oxford chatting to people, maybe at a show etc is OK, but hardly firm information about a widely anticipated model. I will be buying at least on of any version, I am not a GWR modeller as such, I collect and run models of all types. The Dean is an iconic type of Victorian locomotive, which is a poorly covered area of modelling anyway.

 

Stephen.

Edited June 13, 2016 by bertiedog

[Horsetan]

The problem with fixing some of the problems, and being able to do any version, is that having decided to carry on with my Mainline one, will what they release first actually be worth me buying? Or if I do, will they later bring out exactly what I wanted? I could end up with three Dean Goods if I'm not careful, and I don't really need one at all!

 

Thinking ahead to my next broad gauge layout, I wonder if they'll do an as built version that I could convert to P4, to encourage me to complicate the layout by making it mixed gauge!

The agony of choice.