Heljan Baby Deltic

[Ian J.]

Well, the tops of the windows are too low when compared with the grills, but it does appear that the horizontal centre line is in line with the bottom of the cabside windows. This means either the bottom of the cab window is low, or the grills are too tall...

[Baby Deltic]

Well, the tops of the windows are too low when compared with the grills, but it does appear that the horizontal centre line is in line with the bottom of the cabside windows. This means either the bottom of the cab window is low, or the grills are too tall...

 

I would probably go with the latter.

[Baby Deltic]

Looking at the model, its about 1mm between the tops of the bodyside windows and the tops of the bodyside grilles.

[Pete Piszczek]

 

There seems to be an issue with this statement the word - "Assuming". Doesn't this just make the rest of the calculation arbitrary.

In the photo's of the model that I have seen, it looks fine to me. Then I have nothing to compare it with to make a judgement.

 

 

 

ar·bi·trar·y

 

Adjective:

• Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
  

 

 

Not sure how random choice or personal whim has anything to do with using a fairly standard dimension off of wagon drawings...

 

If you have a better buffer to buffer dimension for a Baby Deltic, then by all means offer it. I was putting forth something objective, as opposed to more subjective, "I saw a photo once and it looked fine to me!"

 

We ought to be able to rationally discuss the model without individuals getting offended.

[mark54]

The problem appears to be that the tops of the single and double grill and also bodyside door should all be slightly lower than the top of the radiator grill. On the model they all appear to align. I'm looking at the photos on Hattons as I'm still waiting delivery of mine.

 

Mark

[Baby Deltic]

The problem appears to be that the tops of the single and double grill and also bodyside door should all be slightly lower than the top of the radiator grill. On the model they all appear to align. I'm looking at the photos on Hattons as I'm still waiting delivery of mine.

 

Mark

 

Its well worth the wait.

[Brian Kirby]

No. Take a look at the bodyside windows in relation to the grills and door. They are visibly too low compared to all the photographs of the prototype that I have checked out.

 

Well i've just compared my blue one with various side-on photos ( Don't ever place all your trust in drawings, they are often wrong and stock was often altered as finally built ). The middle of the engine room windows correctly line up with the bottom of the cab windows and look to be the correct size. The ventilation grilles are all in the correct position. If we really do have to split hairs, the pair of vertical grilles are a fraction over-height and ever so-slightly too close together, but it's nothing. The blank engine room door is also possibly half-a-millimetre too high, but it's not obvious and would only be noticed by studying photographs.

 

We are getting into the realms of OCD, with this detail nit-picking. The body is the right shape, everything is near enough in the right position and most importantly, this is the best looking Baby Deltic model so far produced. Ignore the nit-picking and enjoy.

 

Cheers, Brian.

[Baby Deltic]

Such is my concern regarding these discrepencies, I have been left with no other choice other than to order three more Baby Deltics from the second batch.

Edited November 12, 2011 by Baby Deltic

[Darth Vader]

 

 

ar·bi·trar·y

 

 

Adjective:

• Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
  

 

 

 

Not sure how random choice or personal whim has anything to do with using a fairly standard dimension off of wagon drawings...

 

If you have a better buffer to buffer dimension for a Baby Deltic, then by all means offer it. I was putting forth something objective, as opposed to more subjective, "I saw a photo once and it looked fine to me!"

 

We ought to be able to rationally discuss the model without individuals getting offended.

 

Don't understand to reference to me being offended.

I still stand by the use of the word "Arbitary"

Both of our observations are arbitary (personal whim). Whether we take wagon "drawing dimensions" and apply them to a photograph of a model locomotive or casually state that the model looks fine in the photo.

Until we have on in our hot little hands and can run a ruler over the model itself we will not no for sure.

Even when we have the model in the flesh, theire is no actual prototype to make comparisons. We only have photos and drawings.

Question? The photgraph of the model that you used to make youe calculations, was it a full frontal shot or a three quarter view.

[Ian J.]

We are getting into the realms of OCD, with this detail nit-picking. The body is the right shape, everything is near enough in the right position and most importantly, this is the best looking Baby Deltic model so far produced. Ignore the nit-picking and enjoy.

 

Cheers, Brian.

I disagree, I feel the look is spoilt by the error. However I can see I'm in a minority so I will gracefully bow out and go and sit in the corner to count how many times I've washed my hands today...

[Baby Deltic]

No need to 'bow out', just don't buy one. Life would be pretty boring if we all agreed with each other the whole time. How many models out there are truly perfect, dimensionally and aesthetically? I'll bet not one is absolutely on the nail.

 

edit: can't spell

Edited November 12, 2011 by Baby Deltic

[stock_2007]

I don't have any drawings and only one or two photos to go off but I think my D5900 looks great

Has there ever been a rtr loco that was 100% right?

[Pete Piszczek]

 

Don't understand to reference to me being offended.

I still stand by the use of the word "Arbitary"

Both of our observations are arbitary (personal whim). Whether we take wagon "drawing dimensions" and apply them to a photograph of a model locomotive or casually state that the model looks fine in the photo.

Until we have on in our hot little hands and can run a ruler over the model itself we will not no for sure.

Even when we have the model in the flesh, theire is no actual prototype to make comparisons. We only have photos and drawings.

Question? The photgraph of the model that you used to make youe calculations, was it a full frontal shot or a three quarter view.

 

I used the photo in post 228.

 

Do you suppose a railway would have vastly differing horizontal center to center widths for buffer spacing? Regardless of whether we were speaking of a wagon or locomotive?

 

You obviously have no experience measuring photos to derive dimensions. Have you ever accurately measured something from a photo? There have been magazine articles written on the subject. And please don't tell me that unless it is an absolute frontal shot you can't use it to derive dimensions...

 

Again I offered objective numbers to either support or disprove the individuals that are stating that the box is too small. I'm not taking a position either way right now, I happen to like what I have seen of the model, I just don't care for the suggestion that I am tossing numbers out on a whim.

 

These sort of discussions should be constructive...

[Trevor H]

Ok the errors are coming to light.

 

I had my reservations back in the Summer when the pre production model appeared on this thread and contacted HJ with my concerns, But was told, "no it is right", or "we have a few modifications before production".

 

Some of my personal observations have been:

 

Roof

Cantrail curvature is wrong, which offsets over problems (a problem also with their 7mm class 37 and something Bachmannn had problems with).

Small cantrail grill comes down to low.

Roof curvature wrong, an offset from the cantrail curvature.

Roof panels wrong lengths

Exhaust and boiler grilles out of position.

Coolant fan grill to big?

Coolant fan grill doesn't line up with coolant side grilles (this mistake has been done before, never trust others drawings).

 

Bodyside

Tall rectangular grilles are too wide and also sit to high at top.

Engine room door is too high.

Bodyside steps too high.

 

Nose

D light slightly too low

Headcode box too shallow.

Radius where front of nose meets bodyside is wrong

Nose curvature wrong.

Slope on bonnet is too much.

Also where bonnet meets bodyside, it should line up with bottom of drivers window.

 

The problem with any model, is when you start looking at a blown up photos of any model, these errors are going to come to light.

 

I guess their are two types of modeler, those that go to much work and time too get a model correct and those that do a few personal touches and are more than happy with their pride. I believe I fall into the second category and I'm more than happy with my Baby Deltic and from normal viewing its a good looking Baby Deltic to me.

 

Sorry to be the one, off to the stockade now.

Edited November 13, 2011 by Trevor H

[Pennine MC]

 

I guess their are two types of modeler, those that go to much work and time too get a model correct and those that do a few personal touches and are more than happy with their pride. I believe I fall into the second category and I'm more than happy with my Baby Deltic and from normal viewing its a good looking Baby Deltic to me.

 

Sorry to be the one, off to the stockade now.

 

I dont think you are 'the one' Trevor, I think you're quite typical of your ilk and you further illustrate the point I was trying to get across earlier. You've listed fifteen actual or potential errors, which you've decided that you can either live with or do something about yourself. So, that's objective analysis, constructive criticism, sensible decision making and actual modelling (which we 're always being exhorted to do as soon as we say something's not quite right). Seems like a pretty good all round result to me

[Trevor H]

Thank you Ian

 

Its difficult to be constructive with criticism at times, I didn't want to be the first as it easy for others to read something differently to what you intended, but all comes to light eventually.

 

As I mentioned earlier I'm very happy with the model. Their are a couple of small tweaks I'll do, (no more than any other loco and a lot less than some), followed by a new number and weathering to finish.

Edited November 13, 2011 by Trevor H

[Darth Vader]

I used the photo in post 228. Do you suppose a railway would have vastly differing horizontal center to center widths for buffer spacing? Regardless of whether we were speaking of a wagon or locomotive? You obviously have no experience measuring photos to derive dimensions. Have you ever accurately measured something from a photo? There have been magazine articles written on the subject. And please don't tell me that unless it is an absolute frontal shot you can't use it to derive dimensions... Again I offered objective numbers to either support or disprove the individuals that are stating that the box is too small. I'm not taking a position either way right now, I happen to like what I have seen of the model, I just don't care for the suggestion that I am tossing numbers out on a whim. These sort of discussions should be constructive...

 

Not sure how I should respond to this.

I just asked a question about the photo that you used, I did not say your methods were wrong. I had not come across a frontal photo of the model and only asked in case you had, so that you could refer me to the source so that I could see a frontal view.

Having thought about this, it appears that I focused on the word you used “Assume”. I interpreted this as a “best guess”, hence my use of the word arbitrary. Then when a wagon drawing was quoted in context of a locomotive, again misinterpretation on my part.

If we had had this conversation face to face the outcome would be totally different. The trouble with this medium is it is so one dimensional. Subject to the interpretation of the reader, without reference to other clues such as tone of voice or visual clues, (also on my part too quick to post a response before thinking it through).

My main thrust in all of this was to say that comparing photos and taking measurements came be somewhat subjective depending on ones viewpoint or experience.

Until someone can get hold of an actual model to measure it, the view taken will be subject to the persons perception of the photograph.

Some have stated that the head code box is the wrong size and I understand that you were trying to prove/disprove this.

Pete apologies for any misunderstanding between us, it was not my intention to upset you.

At least we both agree that we like what we see in the photo.

[Oldddudders]

These sort of discussions should be constructive...

Dream on!

[bluex5]

Such is my concern regarding these discrepencies, I have been left with no other choice other than to order three more Baby Deltics from the second batch.

 

From what's been written in this thread I'm surprised you were able to recognise what class the models in the blue box were supposed to represent

 

Joking aside, I don't need any more but I would be tempted if they ever did decide to do an "unrebuilt" one.

[Baby Deltic]

 

From what's been written in this thread I'm surprised you were able to recognise what class the models in the blue box were supposed to represent

 

Joking aside, I don't need any more but I would be tempted if they ever did decide to do an "unrebuilt" one.

 

Luckily a description was on the end of the box, so I was able to see what it was.

[Southernman46]

Writing this just after the 2 mins silence - what the hell do any of these "errors" matter REALLY - it's a RTR Baby Deltic which we've never had before - in shape and looks - move on !!

[Baby Deltic]

 

Did I mention someone needs to produce a sound chip? Heck, I'd probably be satisfied with a Deltic on one engine, you can always have the chip reblown if something better comes along...

 

The problem is that the power units are different. The baby deltic engine is only half the size of the bigger D18-25 engines used on the class 55's. It also revs higher and is turbo charged so it screams a bit a full throttle. No doubt a sound recording will be produced using the sole surviving T9-29 engine from the Baby Deltic project. They will probably be able to replicate the sound of an original baby deltic fairly well, but it won't have the clunking wirring sound of all the equipment which was connected to the engine on the original.

[Klink]

Writing this just after the 2 mins silence - what the hell do any of these "errors" matter REALLY - it's a RTR Baby Deltic which we've never had before - in shape and looks - move on !!

 

HearHear!

 

However I can understand where the critisism over errors comes from,,and everyone is welcome to their own opinion of how much detail and shape prototype errors they are willing to.accept.

 

Personally the points mentioned above are niggling but I wont notice when they run!

Out of interest id be curious to see the reaction of a few gents.on here to the Australian 38 class steamer released by eureka models which has parts less.accurate than the old lima model and for about 400 quid!

 

I'm looking forward to seeing tbe BD in the flesh, hopefully the detail probs are limited to the mentioned points.and not.body shape like one of our recent L/E diesels here

 

[Brian D]

Unbelievable! I can't get to grips with all the negativity above. For goodness sake - please can you all get a grip! The model looks super in the photos and I am seriously considering ordering one (should Hattons' web site sort itself out tonight), despite the windows not lining up with the grills or whatever. Perhaps the "rivet counters" should remember that the wheels of the model are only suitable for rails a scale 4 foot apart. That fact alone puts all other critism to bed! The Hejan mechanisms are superb (I've got three other diesels of their's and they are all great runners). As I understand it, there isn't a preserved version to scan with a laser and, to my mind, photographs can be misleading. So give HJ a chance guys for goodness sake!!!

Regards to all.

Brian.

[Phil Bullock]

 

The problem is that the power units are different. The baby deltic engine is only half the size of the bigger D18-25 engines used on the class 55's. It also revs higher and is turbo charged so it screams a bit a full throttle. No doubt a sound recording will be produced using the sole surviving T9-29 engine from the Baby Deltic project. They will probably be able to replicate the sound of an original baby deltic fairly well, but it won't have the clunking wirring sound of all the equipment which was connected to the engine on the original.

 

Hi all

 

Hopefully wont be too long - see

 

Just wish we had the same for the class 22!

 

Phil