OO gauge Crowdfunded APT-P (Warley announcement)

[chris p bacon]

Although with professionals a retainer is sometimes required.

 

That's to massage their ego.

 

Off topic but I don't pay any a retainer, and I've never had one refuse my work yet.

[Crewlisle]

A question about the 10 & 14 car APT sets.  The 10 car set has only one power car & if it is pushing 5 cars, all tilting, surely they have to be quite heavy to stop the dynamics of tilting derailing the front units?  Similarly for the 14 car set.

On these longer sets, all the cars will have to be heavy to stay on the track when being pushed & tilting.  The motor(s) in the power car(s) will have to be very powerful & heavy for traction.  Can they cope with model inclines or even a scale Shap or are they just fit for the 'Flat Earth Layouts'?

 

Peter

Edited May 4, 2018 by Crewlisle

[DJM Dave]

A question about the 10 & 14 car APT sets.  The 10 car set has only one power car & if it is pushing 5 cars, all tilting, surely they have to be quite heavy to stop the dynamics of tilting derailing the front units?  Similarly for the 14 car set.

On these longer sets, all the cars will have to be heavy to stay on the track when being pushed & tilting.  The motor(s) in the power car(s) will have to be very powerful & heavy for traction.  Can they cope with model inclines or even a scale Shap or are they just fit for the 'Flat Earth Layouts'?

 

Peter

Hi,

powered units will have American style chassis in them with maximum designed in weight. non powered power cars will be plastic.

however, all cars will be on pin point bearings, but we are doj d some test models (bespoke, not from the tooling) with projected weights and hopefully working rudimentary tilt to test, check and test again resistances to balance the weight of each coach accordingly.

this will include resistance caused by a possible feature that i hope to announce at the scanning day on june 2nd at Crewe.

 

if needs be we might look at traction tyres on the powered unit, with non traction tyred wheel sets in the box for customer swap out if required.

 

so yes we are looking at it closely, and will publish our findings and hopefully video of the mock up test unit working as soon as we are able.

 

cheers

dave

[dogbox321]

Hi Dave, appreciate your honesty, but for many years people have ridiculed Lima models for having traction tyres........  That were 30/40 year old technology, and for a company thats slogan is "Setting higher standards", is that really the way to go?

 

I did mention this in an recent, earlier post, with particular reference to the 10 car set, that will one motor have enough umph in the middle?  For the speeds, accelleration required for an APT, Plus of course have the necessary weight to enable the coaches to be pushed over point work, curves, etc.  Not to mention that some of us have gradients to consider.....

 

With reagrds the optional swop out of traction tyres, presumably to get "decent" performance over a variety of of situations, the traction tyres are deemed necessary for the traction specification.....  So removal of them is only going to cause some people problems?  By the time extra wheelsets are provided, would it not be just as cheap, to provide an excellent traction package?  Effectively it is only another powered chassis that is already being provided on the remainder of the trains.  (Particularly emphasising the 10 car which is most likely to have the most issues under the current proposal of one motored coach to power 10 vehicles from the middle), so 4 or 5 will always be pushed, with a trailing load of 4-5 coaches too, plus powered coach, over points, round corners, up gradients, and perhaps all at once!  Ultimately, the APT is "promised" to be something "special"  and this is not to sound negative, but for anyone spending the best part of £900 on a 10 car train, whilst the detail spec is to make a superb model", the reality is that to gain necessary performance, you may need traction tyres, otherwise it may slip like the good old Hornby "Pug" 0-4-0!  Sorry but alarm bells are sounding on this, that "on face value" the train is going to look great, but not have satisfactory performance.   (Class 71 speed being a good example!)  

 

 

(Oh, and for the record I have a 14 car, with two motor coaches on order). 

 

Best Regards,

 

C.

[Colin_McLeod]

Hi Dave.

Yes please get the performance right and not just the looks. I have ordered a 14 car set and intend to run it, not have it sitting pretty on a display shelf.

 

I had pre ordered a class 71 with Golden Arrow insigna but when I read on RMweb about the issues regarding low speed I cancelled and bought from Hornby instead. ( sorry )

 

If you do produce a model with traction tyres please make the wheel swap for all metal wheels easy. Better still provide factory fitted metal wheels with the traction tyred ones as extras for those who want them.

 

Regards

Colin

[7APT7]

Hi Dave of DJ Models

 

What will be the minimum Radius Curve for the APT-P, will it be R2 like most of Hornby's Stock or will it be R1 making it look like the TILT is more exaggerated so to speak, also with dogbox321 comments above with regards to inclines etc. and being able to push/pull 4/5 cars at the front and back, will it climb up a Helix of approximately 450mm high or 5/6 rotations of the Helix although some may have higher Helix's than that. 

 

What would be the minimum clearance/distance between the two track radiuses' without hitting each other in either direction in the middle of the coaches, I to have ordered a couple APT-P 14 car sets hence my question when they pass on curves.  I know the Pendolino over hangs the rails somewhat when two pass each other on a curve track in either direction, the Pendolino is probably the extreme/worse to use as an example due to longer coaches, but needs to be confirmed for the APT-P.

 

I'm guessing all these type of questions will be cleared up and answered on June 02, 2018 at Crewe crowd funding day, the questions here within may be to early to answer straight away.

 

Thanks

Jamie

Edited May 5, 2018 by 7APT7

[Andy Mac]

Hi Dave, appreciate your honesty, but for many years people have ridiculed Lima models for having traction tyres........  That were 30/40 year old technology, and for a company thats slogan is "Setting higher standards", is that really the way to go?

 

I did mention this in an recent, earlier post, with particular reference to the 10 car set, that will one motor have enough umph in the middle?  For the speeds, accelleration required for an APT, Plus of course have the necessary weight to enable the coaches to be pushed over point work, curves, etc.  Not to mention that some of us have gradients to consider.....

 

With reagrds the optional swop out of traction tyres, presumably to get "decent" performance over a variety of of situations, the traction tyres are deemed necessary for the traction specification.....  So removal of them is only going to cause some people problems?  By the time extra wheelsets are provided, would it not be just as cheap, to provide an excellent traction package?  Effectively it is only another powered chassis that is already being provided on the remainder of the trains.  (Particularly emphasising the 10 car which is most likely to have the most issues under the current proposal of one motored coach to power 10 vehicles from the middle), so 4 or 5 will always be pushed, with a trailing load of 4-5 coaches too, plus powered coach, over points, round corners, up gradients, and perhaps all at once!  Ultimately, the APT is "promised" to be something "special"  and this is not to sound negative, but for anyone spending the best part of £900 on a 10 car train, whilst the detail spec is to make a superb model", the reality is that to gain necessary performance, you may need traction tyres, otherwise it may slip like the good old Hornby "Pug" 0-4-0!  Sorry but alarm bells are sounding on this, that "on face value" the train is going to look great, but not have satisfactory performance.   (Class 71 speed being a good example!)  

 

 

(Oh, and for the record I have a 14 car, with two motor coaches on order). 

 

Best Regards,

 

C.

Dog box, modern multiple units, 5 pole motors, They have no problem with long rakes of coaches.... Hornby Pendolino, 9 car units either being pushed or pulled race round.... traction tyres seem to make a big difference to a light weight power unit. I was initially a bit sceptical about the performance, but once tried out on track was perfectly happy...Hornby High Detail Hst’s, 8 coach pulse trailer car again no issue.... though I haven’t tried them on very tight curves and steep inclines.....

So I wouldn’t overly worry about the motor performance on generally flat track or gentle radius curves... i’m Sure that whatever the final arrangement is, it’ll be fit for purpose....

[DJM Dave]

Hi,

 

without trying to come across as a smart a ss, i have said that there is still a mock up test model to make and test, taking into account various factors like adhesion, radius curves, mountain climbing, tilt etc.

 

what looks good in a cad cam may still be a dog unless this train is tested to the umpteenth degree before metal cutting, so thats what we are going to do.

i doubt radius 1 curves will be slack enough to be honest, but i'll try. remember , tilt wil be limited so wont tilt out of its parameters.

also a traction tyre set of wheels will be fitted as standard with a non traction tyres set of wheels in the box for those that dont like them.

 

as for traction tyres, some of the best manufacturers in the world use them still and on new models, so its obvious the system works. heck 'if it aint broke, dont fix it' should be the motto here.

 

still a ways to go but i fear we are over analising things before we truly get past the 2nd June 'start line'.

lets see what the test model does first, i suggest, then go from there.

 

One things for sure, im not out to design and supply a good looking train that doesnt deliver as that would be self defeating.

 

cheers

Dave

[Andy Mac]

Hi,

without trying to come across as a smart a ss, i have said that there is still a mock up test model to make and test, taking into account various factors like adhesion, radius curves, mountain climbing, tilt etc.

what looks good in a cad cam may still be a dog unless this train is tested to the umpteenth degree before metal cutting, so thats what we are going to do.

i doubt radius 1 curves will be slack enough to be honest, but i'll try. remember , tilt wil be limited so wont tilt out of its parameters.

also a traction tyre set of wheels will be fitted as standard with a non traction tyres set of wheels in the box for those that dont like them.

as for traction tyres, some of the best manufacturers in the world use them still and on new models, so its obvious the system works. heck 'if it aint broke, dont fix it' should be the motto here.

still a ways to go but i fear we are over analising things before we truly get past the 2nd June 'start line'.

lets see what the test model does first, i suggest, then go from there.

One things for sure, im not out to design and supply a good looking train that doesnt deliver as that would be self defeating.

cheers

Dave

Dave,

 

Please do not compromise the model by even considering making it compatible with first radius curves.... I remember Jason from Rapido, lamenting how difficult it was to get the APT-E to run on 2nd radius curves...

 

Every model i’ve Purchased over the last decade (and that’s a scary amount) all require a minimum of second radius curves.....

[sandwich station]

Dave,

 

Please do not compromise the model by even considering making it compatible with first radius curves.... I remember Jason from Rapido, lamenting how difficult it was to get the APT-E to run on 2nd radius curves...

 

Every model i’ve Purchased over the last decade (and that’s a scary amount) all require a minimum of second radius curves.....

Even Hornby's APT is a minimum of second radius.

[royaloak]

[Puts on tin hat and ducks behind sand bags]

 

I have placed my interest into the APT-P but I am withdrawing my order - with a lot of reluctance.

 

I would recommend crowdfunders read the DJM Class 74 thread and consider very carefully the very high risks involved

 

If Dave is employing the same company to work on the tooling, then the possibility of them taking his money yet again without providing the service are incredibly high. It would also be seen by outside observers as incredibly reckless for him if he did go back to the same company.

 

I also get the feeling, considering how often the delivery timescales of the major manufacturers are slipping back, that they are also having problems with the way business apparently is being conducted in China. What hope then for the little fish?

 

I am reluctant now to commit myself to losing these sorts of sums without assurances. I understand in normal business practice it is natural that Dave does not reveal to his competitors where he is going to get this work done, however I cannot see now that he has much of a choice if he is going to maintain the confidence of crowdfunders who don't have tunnel vision and bottomless pockets.

 

His competitiors probably know anyway.

 

I am happy to be proven wrong - and I hope this does project does find its way and gets past the finishing line.

Anyone who has ordered a 74 is getting a complete refund so please explain the very high risk? Edited May 5, 2018 by royaloak

[delticfan]

It’s funny isn’t it if this project was struggling to make the numbers up to make it viable would we be looking for every reason why the wheels might come off. Wake up everyone you’re in a unique position, full order book plenty of cash, let Dave get on with it and make this happen. It’s like the age old British disease we can’t believe our own abilities to make something a success and always er on the side of failure, think positive for god sake and you never know it might just happen. Rant over.

[Guest JoeHart2]

Could anybody explain the precise role or involvement of DToS in this project as DJM Dave would appear to be fully in charge of designing manufacturing and delivering this crowdfunded model.

 

DToS have kept extremely quiet on this thread while DJM Dave (to his immense credit) has responded to advice, criticism and insult with considerable dignity.

 

I have ordered a yellow 7 car set and paid my first installment (blindly or otherwise according to some) because I believe DJM Dave will deliver this model.  I have always understood my initial (and subsequent) payments could be at risk, as that is the way crowdfunding works.  I believe this is a 'financial' risk I am happy to take with DJM Dave.  Others may not be so happy for many different reasons and coming on board or not remains their choice.

 

Despite some initial issues with some 'orders' not having been properly or legitimately made, we have been told by DJM Dave that the target cash amount from crowdfunders has been reached and the project is live in OO gauge.

 

I still hope to attend the scanning party at Crewe and look forward to meeting other like minded crowdfunders and DJM Dave to celebrate the launch of the manufacture of this iconic model train.

[letterspider]

Anyone who has ordered a 74 is getting a complete refund so please explain the very high risk?

 

AFAIK the Class 74 orders were in a sense underwritten by Kernow and they have offered refunds. Dave says he is out of pocket because the company doing the CAD have taken his money and not delivered them.

 

In the case of the ATP project monies are being managed by DToS but they are not going to offer refunds if this project fails - and considering the amounts involved I can't see Dave having pockets that deep.

 

A lot of commentators on here are saying stop moaning, trust Dave etc. on this APT . Yeah I do trust him but we have now had our eyes open to the process of model manufacture which looks very murky like mafia dealings!

 

Are those same people willing to dip into their pockets and bail him out for being robbed and fobbed by these bandits?

 

I would say put your money where or mouth is - I will chuck in a fiver to Dave's pocket if you do.

Edited May 5, 2018 by letterspider

[chris p bacon]

AFAIK the Class 74 orders were in a sense underwritten by Kernow and they have offered refunds. Dave says he is out of pocket because the company doing the CAD have taken his money and not delivered them.

 

 

 

 

Kernow were the payment facility, if the 74 had come to fruition then they would have received recompense for their services, as it stands the Cads haven't materialised and Kernow are refunding monies, the loss to them is the payment charges that acrue with the use of credit/debit cards.

DJM has lost the monies paid for Cad etc.

 

Kernow were not 'Underwriters', if they were then there would be no need to 'crowdfund' as they would have underwritten the project,  and it would have their name on it not DJM.

[Legend]

Anyone who has ordered a 74 is getting a complete refund so please explain the very high risk?

I’m not sure you have contracted on quite the same basis.

 

With Kernow you are certainly getting a refund , so no questions there.

 

With the APT your stake appears to be at risk, reference post 636 from DJM. This is an investment to get an APT, but your capital could be at risk.

 

A contributory factor is that originally there was uncertainty over who you were contracting with, Durham Trains of Stanley or DJM. This has now been clarified by DJM who states it is him you are contracting with. However as well as not knowing who you were contracting with terms and conditions do not appear to have been sent out , so again there is confusion.

 

I think really Dave has to send the terms and conditions to everyone that’s ordered, perhaps also post a copy on here, then you will have absolute clarity what you signed up to. Until that point I’d be concerned that some think there can be no loss, as with Kernow , while the reality may be different

Edited May 5, 2018 by Legend

[Colin_McLeod]

Sending out terms now may be academic.

[Legend]

Sending out terms now may be academic.

I think sending out terms is still essential and have someone sign something to say they accept them . Otherwise how on earth for people know what they’ve signed up to.

[jjb1970]

I think sending out terms is still essential and have someone sign something to say they accept them . Otherwise how on earth for people know what they’ve signed up to.

 

Given that this project has gone way beyond the sort of sums that people will be able to just write off and move on with no worries I'd think some sort of detailed terms and conditions would be essential for mutual protection.

 

For DJM it would offer protection if things were to go wrong. The last thing anybody would want is for a supplier to end up mired in misselling allegations or some such like based on a failure to provide the necessary information and to clearly define their obligations etc.

 

On the client side it offers protection in that what they are funding and what DJM is required to deliver.

 

Things like T&C's may not get many juices flowing and they're rarely page turners but they're there for a good reason, one of which is to make sure all parties to an agreement know what they've agreed to and what their obligations. My advice to all as an interested observer is to get robust T&C's together which conform with applicable legal requirements in terms of information etc.

[Legend]

Given that this project has gone way beyond the sort of sums that people will be able to just write off and move on with no worries I'd think some sort of detailed terms and conditions would be essential for mutual protection.

 

For DJM it would offer protection if things were to go wrong. The last thing anybody would want is for a supplier to end up mired in misselling allegations or some such like based on a failure to provide the necessary information and to clearly define their obligations etc.

 

On the client side it offers protection in that what they are funding and what DJM is required to deliver.

 

Things like T&C's may not get many juices flowing and they're rarely page turners but they're there for a good reason, one of which is to make sure all parties to an agreement know what they've agreed to and what their obligations. My advice to all as an interested observer is to get robust T&C's together which conform with applicable legal requirements in terms of information etc.

Exactly . Terms and conditions work both ways . It’s also protection for DJM further down the line . Everyone knows where they stand

[LongRail]

I have to,wonder how many people who keep mentioning risk and failure have actually signed up to buy one

[loickebros]

All this negativity is not helping!

It has been made clear from day one that this project is crowdfunded and if you don't understand the concept then don't sign up.

If you did sign up early days and are now having cold feet  then man up and say so instead of trying to hide behind the blanket of terms & conditions.

The more people threatening to cancel orders only makes it more likely for the project to fail and all of us to lose our funds.

Personally I have no doubt about the project and find it disappointing that the N modelers have not supported this as they have far more chance of running it as a full set.

Hope to see the believers at Crewe.

 

 

 

[7APT7]

Hi all...

 

I've Ordered several extra's in hope it helps keep the project from failing, if we all done the same it will just cement the orders and guarantee the outcome to be a great success which is what we all want out of this project and I ordered the extra's way before all the T&C's talk began and making sure crossing every 'T' and Dotting all the 'i's' ever began. DJM and DToS will do a great job in seeing the job through, I look forward to when I see mine running round a layout at a model show near you, along with the N-Gauge versions.

 

Can not the N-Gauge guys place orders to double cement the guaranteed outcome, and lets get the numbers up together.

 

Out of interest Dave @DJM how near are we to the N-Gauge meeting their targets...? If it's only a few and we know how many extra order's are needed, it may just help ones to consider buying to help meet your targets that you require and also on the OO version how many over... is it better than you predicted it would be! (I hope it's by Loads, personally)

 

It's such a great project and we should all be backing Dave @DJM rather than pulling all he is trying to achieve apart, yes... it may be a learning curve on how to go around doing things certainly for any future projects but let's all build a bridge and get over it together so we are all in together and therefore all will win the prize of the end... An APT-P

 

I will be at the Crowd Funding Day and I am looking forward to meeting all those that have placed orders.

 

Regards

Jamie

Edited May 5, 2018 by 7APT7

[Horsetan]

I have to,wonder how many people who keep mentioning risk and failure have actually signed up to buy one

Well, I saw an all-etched APT project at Scaleforum last year, and I'd be keen to try that if it ever comes to market....

[letterspider]

All this negativity is not helping!

It has been made clear from day one that this project is crowdfunded and if you don't understand the concept then don't sign up.

If you did sign up early days and are now having cold feet  then man up and say so instead of trying to hide behind the blanket of terms & conditions.

The more people threatening to cancel orders only makes it more likely for the project to fail and all of us to lose our funds.

Personally I have no doubt about the project and find it disappointing that the N modelers have not supported this as they have far more chance of running it as a full set.

Hope to see the believers at Crewe.

 

Well Crowdfunding is an evolving phenomenon and there is no reason why we cannot try and improve the funding model to something that would be more sustainable in the long term.

In any case most start ups I have observed may use crowdfunding initially but then move on to standard means of selling.

 

Andy I do think it is reckless for contributors on here to goad others who are being risk averse and by any normal measures 'sensible'

Let the debate continue but if you don't have anything constructive to say, leave the thread alone for those who do.

Edited May 6, 2018 by letterspider