KR Models announced intention: Haydock Foundry 0-6-0WT 'Bellerophon'

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

I can see the eccentrics moving in the video. If you go to the YouTube video itself and click settings and set the speed to 0.25x then zoom in on the rear axle it’s clearly moving. As noted the radius rod isn’t apparently moving in this and appears to be on a fixed bracket. 
 

I can't actually see how the eccentrics move - what I can see is what appears to be a one piece moulding of the two eccentric rods with a constant angle between them irrespective of the angle of the drive pin to the axle centre.  I still can't see if the expansion link moves so I'm still not sure if does move (and how it would move with both eccentric rods at what appears to be a constant relative angle?).

 

Have a look at the working valve gear on this Fleischmann model and you can see very clearly how the eccentric rods work because here they are really driven by eccentrics instead of from a single point of drive whi ch is not eccentric to the axle.  Slow ths one down and you will see exactly what happens.  However this model has the mechanical and manufacturing advantage of having a much shorter radius rod than Ballly Ruffian

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-ZpZovoX_g

 

Whether KR actually know what they are talking about when it comes to a description which says 'working valvegear' is one thing and something very difficult to achieve on a model of this size.  But if they continue to state that their model has 'working valvegear' some purchasers might well be in for some disappointment although equally some (many?) won't know the difference or probably won't care.

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by The Stationmaster

[PaulRhB]

4 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

what I can see is what appears to be a one piece moulding of the eccentric rods with a constant angle between them irrespective of the angle of the drive pib n to the axle centre.  I still can't see if the expansion link moves so I'm still not sure if does move (and how it would move with both eccentric rids at what appears to be aconstant relative angle.

Yes I’m not sure it’s two eccentrics moving correctly, I suspect it may be a one piece etch / moulding giving the impression of it but it’s too dark to tell. We would need to see it on rollers with a steady camera to see how it’s moving. I suspect correctly working ones will be extremely delicate too and a nightmare for returns. The working examples on some European locos are at a much higher end price point where people expect to handle them like museum pieces and I’m not sure some in the market KR are aiming at are quite ready to accept they can’t be cack handed around such details 😉 Having reattached similar etched valve gear on a friends kit built loco it left me wanting to beat it with a lump hammer as it was impossible to fix on the loco and I ended up fixing it on a flat sheet and using a piece of tape as a carrier to get it back on the three attachment points without getting the rods tangled. Getting the tape off without dislodging the pins was nerve wracking!

[Edwardian]

I hope Andy Y will forgive me purloining his picture.

 

Here then, I think, having adopted the excellent tip of slowing down the video of the EP, is what the model does and does not do (as correctly guessed by keen observers):

 

 

 

Here is the real thing. From c.2.50 in you get a good close up of the motion in, well, motion.

 

 

I find it hard to understand KR's intent here.

 

Apart from the slight and unprotypical movement of the eccentric rods (if so called), which seem to be moulded in black plastic and remain at a constant angle rather than scissoring to drive the missing crank, the only 'motion' that acheives motion is the coupling and connecting rods, just as on any model of an outside cylinder loco.

 

So, my problem is this; I cannot reconcile this lack of movement of the Gooch valve gear with KR's claim that it all works.

 

I wondered, then, if the sample was intended to have the missing crank (visually it's a pretty noticeable omission) and for it all to work once connected, but the rod that goes up to the crank above footplate, the eccentric rods and the long valve rod all look like rigid items, not intended to move.

 

  

 

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by Edwardian
Further thoughts

[Colin_McLeod]

3 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

 

 

Edit:  given the complexity of the steam engine on the manufacturer's Shay model,  then surely it is not beyond possibility that the valve gear operation could not be simulated on the "Bellerophon" model.

 

With all those negatives I'm not clear what you are saying.  Are you saying that it could be simulated or are you  saying that it could not be simulated?

 

30 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I hope Andy Y will forgive me purloining his picture.

 

Here then, I think, having adopted the excellent tip of slowing down the video of the EP, is what the model does and does not do (as correctly guessed by keen observers):

 

 

 

Here is the real thing. From c.2.50 in you get a good close up of the motion in, well, motion.

 

 

I find it hard to understand KR's intent here.

 

Apart from the slight and unprotypical movement of the eccentric rods (if so called), which seem to be moulded in black plastic and remain at a constant angle rather than scissoring to drive the missig crank, the only 'motion' that acheives motion is the couplung and cinnecting rods, just as on any model of an outside cylinder loco.

 

So, my problem is this; I cannot reconcile this lack of movement of the Gooch valve gear with KR's claim that it all works.

 

I wondered, then, if the sample was intended to have the missing crank and to work (visually it's a pretty noticeable omission), but the rod that goes up to the crank above footplate, the eccentric rods and the long valve rod all look like rigid items, not intended to move.

 

  

 

 

 

A very good post.  Video at 2:55 and following seconds shows the valve gear very clearly.

 

I agree with "I cannot reconcile this lack of movement of the Gooch valve gear with KR's claim that it all works."

 

 

If the model is "the only 'motion' that acheives motion is the coupling and connecting rods, just as on any model of an outside cylinder loco.," then I have changed my mind about wanting this loco.  It was the unusually complex valve gear /motion that attracted me in the first place.

[BVMR21]

Surely it might be best to email the manufacturer to ask if they could do a rolling road test with the model to allow us to get a better idea of it’s running qualities, valve gear, etc. Seeing as we have had (as mentioned earlier) a fairly poor demonstration. Though is it really such a bad thing? I do believe when this loco was first announced as an EOI it was something like £195 it’s now £160 so maybe there has been some cost cutting in the design phase to bring it down to the level where not all of it works but it looks good on a layout.

End of the day, what matters is that it runs well, the detail is (mostly) there and that it won’t break when being handled with some care.

[chris p bacon]

23 minutes ago, BVMR21 said:

 I do believe when this loco was first announced as an EOI it was something like £195 it’s now £160 

Beware, the KR site does not include VAT.
A DCC ready in delivery black is £205 paid up front. 

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, BVMR21 said:

Surely it might be best to email the manufacturer to ask if they could do a rolling road test with the model to allow us to get a better idea of it’s running qualities, valve gear, etc.

 

 

The Army loves a volunteer! Well done that man!

 

1 minute ago, BVMR21 said:

 

Seeing as we have had (as mentioned earlier) a fairly poor demonstration.

 

 

Well except it is sufficiently clear what does and does not move in terms of valve gear on the sample.

 

What is unclear is whether more of it is intended to work when apparently missing parts are added. 

 

The only guide as to that of which I am aware is Colin McLeod's exchange:

 

"Can you confirm that all the visible valve gear actually operates, or is it simplified a bit?"

 

To which precise question KR gave the response "it all works"

 

The movement of the EP belies that response, but, as I say, perhaps the EP is not complete and fully functioning in this regard.

 

This is, however, speculation in the face of uncertainty, so perhaps there is a question to ask here if you've a mind to. The question is whether they intend to make any additions or modifications to the Gooch valve gear as seen on the EP because, frankly, as seen it's not complete and not very much of it moves at all and the bit that does is not moving prototypically. 

 

 

1 minute ago, BVMR21 said:

 

Though is it really such a bad thing?

 

 

Yes.

 

1 minute ago, BVMR21 said:

I do believe when this loco was first announced as an EOI it was something like £195 it’s now £160 so maybe there has been some cost cutting in the design phase to bring it down to the level where not all of it works but it looks good on a layout.

 

Even assuming those figures are correct, I would imagine most people would rather pay a further £35 for working Gooch valve gear than £35 less to see the coupling rods whirring round behind some static black mouldings.

 

I could be wrong in that, of course. 

 

 

1 minute ago, BVMR21 said:

End of the day, what matters is that it runs well, the detail is (mostly) there and that it won’t break when being handled with some care.

 

I'm not sure that's my view. I think what matters is that if you choose to offer a model with complicated valve gear (and absolutely no one made them do that!) you have thereby undertaken to replicate the movement of said valve gear, and I suspect operating Gooch valve gear is much of the attraction here.

 

Besides, one of the reasons for buying RTR, along with 'it saves me building one' and 'it's better than I could make one' is surely 'well, I could never have made that'!?! 

 

 

 

[AY Mod]

5 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

Beware, the KR site does not include VAT.
A DCC ready in delivery black is £205 paid up front. 

 

I've got an NCB green one sitting there at £164.50 inc. postage - you only get the end price when you've put delivery details in.

 

[AY Mod]

9 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

if you choose to offer a model with complicated valve gear (and absolutely no one made them do that!) you have thereby undertaken to replicate the movement of said valve gear, and I suspect operating Gooch valve gear is much of the attraction here.

 

My comment to Keith, directly, on day one was "Well, if you can make all the motion work as it should, I'll buy it" and I'll stand by that as I know the real thing well, plus I've driven it (for a short distance).

[NHY 581]

Interesting......

 

The situation as I see it is that KR Models are producing a well known preserved loco. Critical to the successful reproduction of this model is an authentic recreation of the somewhat complicated outside valve gear. 

 

KR models say the model will include working valve gear. This is not a model where a nod to this will be acceptable. 

 

The EP, shown running in a bit of film endorsed with the manufactuers logo doesn't appear to show fully working valve gear though elements of it certainly move about. 

 

There then follows speculation on this forum of just how well the valve gear will be replicated. 

 

The worrying thing is nothing official is coming from KR models to confirm things, one way or the other except a somewhat concise reply to an enquiry sent by a potential customer via facebook. 

 

Like others on here, I'm in if it all works as it should and that's a reasonable expectation, given modern standards and the price we are being asked to pay. 

 

I think this is something that only the maufactuers can confirm, once and for all. 

 

Working valve gear or FULLY working valve gear. 

 

Because until they do, I'll not be ordering one.......and I would venture, I'm not alone. 

 

 

Rob. 

 

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by NHY 581

[adb968008]

2 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

 

 

The worrying thing is nothing official is coming from KR models to confirm things, one way or the other except a somewhat concise reply to an enquiry sent by a potential customer via facebook. 

 

I had those same fears with the Fell.

 

Remember everything theyve done so far, has been repeated. Its not a limited edition, or unrepeatable… patience may be a blessing.

 

I sold my first GT3, because the 2nd release one was updated with corrections.

[AussieEE]

I pre-ordered the first run GT3 and that thing wasn't a great runner. I was very interested in Bellerophon but if its not a fully working valve gear then thats a no from me. Once bitten, twice shy when it comes to pre-ordering from KR without physical proof.

[BVMR21]

I’m hoping that Bellerophon runs at least as well as it does in the video we have seen, it’s not perfect but it’s not the worst I’ve ever seen, one could argue that the PR aspect of KR Models could do with a bit of improvement seeing as the replies that I’ve seen from KR compared to the likes of Rapido, Hornby, etc are rather short sharp and not very informative, admittedly this is only on Facebook but as anyone in a customer facing role will know it’s all about the interaction between the company and customer that sells the product.

 

If KR Models were to show a running video and/or maybe have said “X isn’t what we want so that will change between now and the next Sample stage” then I think it might be better for a customer information perspective.

Myself, I’m using Bellerophon to see if I’m future I will purchase further KR Models stock, if it goes badly I won’t buy from them again simple as.

[chris p bacon]

5 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

I've got an NCB green one sitting there at £164.50 inc. postage - you only get the end price when you've put delivery details in.

 

 

Weird, I've just got the same choosing Delivery Black, but at lunchtime on the phone it came out at £205 and I had UK as the delivery destination.

[BVMR21]

7 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

Weird, I've just got the same choosing Delivery Black, but at lunchtime on the phone it came out at £205 and I had UK as the delivery destination.

Seems odd, doubt they’ve changed the price, still says £133.33 on the Website before adding taxes as well

[Edwardian]

This morning finds me a little more pessimistic concerning valve gear because a couple of things make me think that what we see on the EP is what we are intended to get and that KR appear to consider this equates to 'all the valve gear working', which it really doesn't!

 

[EDIT: It is actually stated in the KR Models Youtube description that "As you can see it's a smooth runner with all the valve gear fully functional and working". That statement is patently misleading, as it seems to me necessarily to imply that the distinctive Gooch valve gear is working, which is untrue]

 

 

Howevever, before I say why I am feeling pessimistic, I should stress that I could be wrong and hope I am, and I have explained the issue in detail both on the KR website contact form and on the KR Facebook page and asked for clarification. I will let you know what if any response these enquiries may elicit. 

 

But why the pessimism?

 

Well, you will recall that a vital and prominent element of the Gooch valve gear, the central rocking crank that should connect the eccentric rods with the rest of the motion, is ommitted from the EP. Well, it's omitted from the livery graphics too. While hardly decisive, this did sugget to me that KR do not intend to include this feature, without which there is no possibility of working valve gear.

 

The second reason that I am lacking confidence is a review of KR's Facebook posts, which nevertheless seem to insist that we have been presented with working Gooch valve gear.

 

In addition to Colin McLeod of this parish's exchange, which he kindly posted earlier, another correspondent posted:

 

"Stephensons valve gear shall be interesting to see"

 

To which KR responded: "There's a video on our youtube channel that shows it all working."

 

Spoiler alert: It really doesn't!

 

In short, KR appear to be claiming that they have already delivered working Gooch valve gear (when they absolutely haven't) so, it seems to me, are unlikely to be planning to do more than they have.  So, the only fair thing to do is to put that to them and seek clarification.

 

Thus, I have posted this picture and, in reference to it, explained what the EP video actually shows:

 

 

 

The boss (1) revolves. This causes the rods (2) and (3) to move forward and back slightly behind (4). That is the only part of the valve gear that does move and it is not a prototypical movement. Rods (2) and (3) appear to remain at a fixed angle, as if moulded as a single piece, whereas they should be separate rods that move independently of one another in a scissoring motion to rock the crank at (5),

 

The ends of rods (2) and (3) should connect to this prominent crank (5), which is absent from the EP and the livery graphics.

 

The missing crank (5) should connect to the vertical rod (6), which moves the crank above the footplate, and also moves the long valve rod (7). There is no crank (5) however, and no connection to elements (6) and (7) which, therefore, do not move at all and appear to be static mouldings.

 

It follows that there is quite a bit of missing engineering to add before it can be said that the Gooch/Stephenson valve gear is working.

 

If you look at the rods I have labelled (2), (3) and (4) on the annotated picture above, you see that on KR's EP sample they all have holes as if intended to connect to the missing crank (5), so I am trying to persuade myself that the EP sample simply shows an incomplete set of valve gear that will be finished as working valve gear in due course, but that's not really consistent with the present claims that "it's all working". It's not all there, never mind all working.

 

 

I have, therefore, asked KR if we can expect the changes necessary to deliver this as working elements and make good the claim that there will be working valve gear.

 

Finally, I pointed out that as I am a pre-order customer, a sufficient answer would be greatly appreciated. 

 

So, I return to my first comment on the subject - we'll just have to wait and see - but I remain perplexed; The EP cries out to me that the Gooch valve gear is simply incomplete, unfinished at this stage and intended to be completed and intended to work. 

 

On the other hand we have KR trumpeting what it has produced thus far as fully working valve gear, job done. 

 

Hmmm....

 

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Edwardian

[Colin_McLeod]

@Jenny Emily did't you get a look at this locomotive in motion at one point? If so, can you throw any light on this discussion?

[DavidH]

12 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

@Jenny Emily did't you get a look at this locomotive in motion at one point? If so, can you throw any light on this discussion?

 

You're playing with fire 😁

[Ruston]

This is silly. We've got at least two pages of discussion as to whether or not the valve gear works. We're having to speculate on whether or not parts are missing from the sample model and study Youtube videos and chop out stills etc. We shouldn't be having to do this.

 

More than anything, model railways as a business is about the customers, i.e. us. If this was being produced by Accurascale, Rapido, or a number of other newer, and perhaps smaller, companies other than the more established Hornby or Bachmann, then we would have the company owners or the designers  themselves engaging with us and clarifying exactly what works, what doesn't and why.

[Edge]

.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Edge

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, Edge said:

Well unfortunately, whenever KR Models said anything on here, people seemed to delight in jumping down their throats in order to attack them. Unfortunately, the current silence on here may be a consequence of that.

 

for the time being, there is a video of an EP, which we all know is subject to revision, and an assurance from KR that the valve gear will work as per the prototype, so until there is further evidence either way, then I’m not sure that there is more which can be added

 

Neither true nor fair. KR have shown a sample and made specific claims about it that do not appear to be borne out. That is not the same as people delightling in jumping down KR's throat, which remark is unfair to the thoughtful and sincere contributions several forum members have made, and seems designed merely to generate heat but no light.

 

The current critique is a consequence of what KR have claimed; people invested in this product are struggling to understand why KR are making claims that, on KR's own evidence, seem unsupported or untrue, while naturally hoping for the best. In the absence of clarity from KR, and while we await any further response from, it is the most they can do to evaluate the information available. 

 

Your fan-blaming is certainly no part of the answer.  

[The Stationmaster]

A couple of points occur to me. firstly I wonder, genuinely, if KR knew what valvegear is when they started this project?  Or is the EP someway short of the production model in this respect?  Only KR can clarify that

 

Secondly with existing examples of models with working outside Gooch (or Stephenson) valvegear available in. HO r-t-r it isn't  unreasonable to say that if someone says they are going to deliver it on an 00 model then that is what they will do (notwithstanding in the case of Bally Ruffian the additional problem presented by that very long, fairly small diameter, radius rod).   If it really were to have working valvegear it would be a very attractive model for me - at present it isn't.

 

One further point occurs to me.  With their very promising looking new Black 5 would Hornby ever tackle the Stephenson valvegear version and what would it be like?  It would probably, of necessity, come with a premium price because of the added assembly complexitt but I'd definitely buy one of those IF the valvegear worked (even if it's set in mid gear)

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by The Stationmaster
typo

[jjb1970]

I have no skin in this game, it's not a prototype I like (no offense to those who are clearly passionate about it) and it's not a model I would buy.

 

Which may be why I am willing to give KR the benefit of the doubt on this one and see whether the final model has working valve gear.

 

Personally, and it's just my own opinion, the working valve gear wouldn't be an issue for me either way even if it was a prototype I like. I suspect that to make it noticeable the movement would be exaggerated, making it debatable as to whether working gear is really more accurate.

 

However, if advertised as having working valve gear then that's what should be delivered. If during development it is found that fixed gear is a better compromise (something I am perfectly happy to accept) then potential customers should be informed.

 

That said, we'll see.

[Schooner]

I appreciate they've been contacted elsewhere but, noting this is not the manufacturer's thread nor followed by them, perhaps @KR Models should get a nudge.

 

If I had paid £160 for a model advertised with 'fully working valve gear' (surely a major attraction of model and prototype), I would be concerned by @Edwardian's analysis.

[Edge]

59 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Neither true nor fair. KR have shown a sample and made specific claims about it that do not appear to be borne out. That is not the same as people delightling in jumping down KR's throat, which remark is unfair to the thoughtful and sincere contributions several forum members have made, and seems designed merely to generate heat but no light.

 

The current critique is a consequence of what KR have claimed; people invested in this product are struggling to understand why KR are making claims that, on KR's own evidence, seem unsupported or untrue, while naturally hoping for the best. In the absence of clarity from KR, and while we await any further response from, it is the most they can do to evaluate the information available. 

 

Your fan-blaming is certainly no part of the answer.  

My comments were directed at the general treatment of KR models on here in previous projects, which I personally believed to be far too far to be considered reasonable, rather than in this specific instance. The comments were made in response to a post which was stating that they wished KR Models would respond on here (or words to that effect). My position on this is that considering the manner in which their representatives in the forum were treated previously that it is hardly surprising that they choose to avoid it.

 

nonetheless, my words appear to have had a different effect to those I intended, so I have saved everyone the bother of reading them by deleting the initial post. I’ll also refrain from posting again from now on