Dapol 'Western'

[Guest jim s-w]

Iol I guess why I'm bleating Jim is because I so wanted us to produce "the model" with very little margin for improvement and it rather irks me that I havnt. :-(

Mind you, if you buy one its not that bad ;-)

Hi Dave

 

There will always be those who look to improve something Dave. Given the restrictions of manufacture i doubt anyone will ever "do" perfect from a box but as i keep saying it looks a great model regardless, i certainly havent lost sight of that.

 

Besides for those of us who like to fiddle about if you did give us perfection wheres the fun in that?

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited February 19, 2013 by jim s-w

[S.A.C Martin]

Ah, but what's really annoying is the people literally coming out of the woodwork now when comments earlier in the process (and let's be clear the models been round in various incantations for over 12 months, and I know at least 1 commentator has seem it in this time but remained silent) this could have altered the model still further to make it not just a good model but a blinking fantastic one.

 

In fairness, no one on RMweb was getting paid for helping to develop the Western in terms of its Cad/Cam. I read the whole of that thread and there was nothing but good, constructive debate and helpful posts in there. It's not the job of the end consumer to do all of the R&D for the manufacturers of these model railway products. You can't have it both ways, in short.

 

You can't reap the rewards of what is the best 4mm Western produced yet (and I must qualify that by saying that no one has denied this fact, only offered up opinions as to how to improve it further) using free advice, given freely, and also then bemoan the fact that certain things haven't come to light because a few people haven't noticed it. It's not ever been the job members of RMweb to notice these things and point it all out for Dapol.

 

The Western has been a great exercise in unrelated, unpaid people helping out a manufacturer to produce a model that everyone is very happy with, but I can't help but feel there's a little bit of "biting the hand which feeds you" going on here, particularly when it's been people like Geoff and a few of the other RMweb regulars who helped Dapol out rather extensively in the Cad/Cam stage.

[Guest jim s-w]

Mickey, why are you fixated on driving these damn things. I've been a BR driver (1980s) and can say without hesitation that the bulk of drivers had no interest whatsoever in the appearance of them. It was simply a job which put food on the table for their families.

 

Dave

 

Certainly how most drivers i have met think Dave. They are just a tool, as long as they did what they were supposed to without blowing up why should they care what they looked like?

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Andy Y]

Given how much work I've done on other models to correct issues I'm mightily relieved at how little I expect to have to do on this one. Unfortunately, modellers expect to have to improve RTR models and this can work against perfecting a model designed in the way that your Western has been.

 

Dave  

 

Maybe I'm perverse but I'm more likely to do further work on a loco that's very close to perfect than one that's a good way off and this is one where I know any efforts will be worth it. If the manufacturer makes the effort so will I (hence not owning any EM1s),

[43179]

Five minutes modelling later:

 

 

 

 

(the marks on the glazing is actually a little bit of water stuck behind from rinsing it clean)

I just polished the black surrounds off with Cif - easy. It does look better , will see how it then looks with the Dapol numbers popped behind.

 

Jon 

[Andy Y]

but I can't help but feel there's a little bit of "biting the hand which feeds you" going on here, 

 

I don't think it's anything of the sort Simon but it's an understandable reaction to a succession of slightly acidic comments from one quarter. Please bear that in mind before lecturing.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Maybe I'm perverse but I'm more likely to do further work on a loco that's very close to perfect than one that's a good way off and this is one where I know any efforts will be worth it. If the manufacturer makes the effort so will I (hence not owning any EM1s),

 

Andy,

 

....in the 80s it was just a case of accepting how bad many of the models were and doing the best job that you could to improve them. Frustrating but reality.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[Downendian]

Unfortunately I didn't see these errors at the CAD/CAM stage- Jim's comparative shots are pretty conclusive. I'll only know the errors for sure with model in hand and the thousands of prototype pics I have. Those that are critical of Geoff's comments clearly don't know his pedigree he's one of the top Western aficionados. It's also difficult to see that Dapol were relying so heavily on our input to correct any anomaly,

 

Dave we would have inputted of course- but something happened between the CAD CAM and the prepro model. The headcode box needs some attention I'm afraid to get the 100% Western. It's a mystery to me how this happened.

 

Neil

[the-gog]

Five minutes modelling later:

 

IMG_7139.JPG

 

 

 

(the marks on the glazing is actually a little bit of water stuck behind from rinsing it clean)

I just polished the black surrounds off with Cif - easy. It does look better , will see how it then looks with the Dapol numbers popped behind.

 

Jon 

It's a big improvement, isn't it? All that it would then need is to draw the black grommet onto the surround and Bob should be your uncle.

[S.A.C Martin]

I don't think it's anything of the sort Simon but it's an understandable reaction to a succession of slightly acidic comments from one quarter. Please bear that in mind before lecturing.

 

In fairness Andy, I made that comment taking into account a few of the rather more abrasive comments aimed at Mr Leigh and Model Rail previously in this thread (for which there is still no apology forthcoming. A pity since neither Mr Leigh nor Model Rail have at any point been as "acidic" as you seem to imply other posters have been). 

 

Anyone complaining about a perceived lack of people coming forward to offer help on this model seems to be particularly harsh on the RMweb faithful who did help out: and that to me does seem like biting the hand which feeds you I am afraid. 

 

I think DapolDave has done a great job previously in coordinating a lot of responses on RMweb and Dapol have produced a cracker of a model. Some things have popped up which seem easy fixes on the face of it, but as you said in your own post:

 

 

Maybe I'm perverse but I'm more likely to do further work on a loco that's very close to perfect than one that's a good way off and this is one where I know any efforts will be worth it. 

 

That's pretty much how many people have seen the Western in this thread, and then get shot down constantly for being too negative or not presenting their opinion at the right time. Hardly seems fair to me to be frank.

Edited February 19, 2013 by S.A.C Martin

[43179]

Hi all ,  right , last picture from me tonight -  I am good to you lot. 

 

got the water out of the headcode box thingy now   and popped one of the supplied headcodes in.

I'll bow to superior knowledge and let you decide if this now makes the Dapol headcodes look correct or not 

I'll do the other end and run a fine black pen around all the apetures (after painting the yellow panels of course) , and that should do the trick.

 

So, ive 'ruined' my D1000 , already , do i win a prize?

 

This has been a fun evening!

 

Jon 

 

 

 

[Andy Y]

Never let facts get in the way of supposition. 

[Geoff Endacott]

Sorry Geoff but saying something is wrong like the headcode numbers is only constructive if you say how I could get them improved, what size they have to be etc.

 

You asked that question on 23 July and several people on here answered it. I did not add to those posts because you had already been given the information you required.

 

And as, believe it or not, I am trying to help people to improve the model, the characters are approximately 12 inches high. Precision Labels make headcodes of 4.0mm and 3.6mm. One of those sounds about right.

 

As for acidity, surely only slightly. No less than pH 6.9...

 

Geoff Endacott

Edited February 19, 2013 by Geoff Endacott

[Guest jim s-w]

 

This has been a fun evening!

 

Jon

Hi Jon

 

Better but id still consider opening them out a bit more. Certainly worth thinking about the curved tops perhaps but of course you would need new glazing then.

 

So, ive 'ruined' my D1000 , already , do i win a prize?

 

You will be throwing away the box next!

 

HTH

 

Jim

Edited February 19, 2013 by jim s-w

[the-gog]

Hi all ,  right , last picture from me tonight -  I am good to you lot. 

IMG_7141.JPG

 

got the water out of the headcode box thingy now   and popped one of the supplied headcodes in.

I'll bow to superior knowledge and let you decide if this now makes the Dapol headcodes look correct or not 

I'll do the other end and run a fine black pen around all the apetures (after painting the yellow panels of course) , and that should do the trick.

 

So, ive 'ruined' my D1000 , already , do i win a prize?

 

This has been a fun evening!

 

Jon 

By the looks of it, the glazing should be completely clear of the black rubber surround. I'd have thought that the easiest way to do it is to make up a jig out of something like thin balsa that could slot through the vertical handrails, stick it over the headcode box with a couple of blobs of blu-tak either side, then draw round the cut-outs in the balsa with a thin black pen. (Maybe a fibre tip?) Ideally a Bob Moore lining pen if anyone has one. I wonder if someone will make up an etch for the rubber surround - attaching it will be pretty tricky, though.

 

RWJ

[the-gog]

Another fictitious name: D1188 WESTERN HANDBAGS

Hi Jon

 

Better but id still consider opening them out a bit more. Certainly worth thinking about the curved tops perhaps but of course you would need new glazing then.

I think the clear glazing is now the right size. If it was opened out any more, there wouldn't be any room to draw in the black rubber surround. It's the current lack of the surround that makes it look artificially small. When Jon draws it in, it should all fall into place and look correct size.

 

RWJ

[Jon020]

Hi all ,  right , last picture from me tonight -  I am good to you lot. 

IMG_7141.JPG

 

got the water out of the headcode box thingy now   and popped one of the supplied headcodes in.

I'll bow to superior knowledge and let you decide if this now makes the Dapol headcodes look correct or not 

I'll do the other end and run a fine black pen around all the apetures (after painting the yellow panels of course) , and that should do the trick.

 

So, ive 'ruined' my D1000 , already , do i win a prize?

 

This has been a fun evening!

 

Jon 

Yee gads... I think you do deserve a prize Jon... Improvements already. Yes, that's all a help isn't it. actually, I'm pleased that there's a little for us modellers to do. I was beginnign to think that I'd end up with a model looking just like everyone else's... but no, we can take it just that little bit further. Superb! Oh, no that was a 50 wasn't it!

[the-gog]

er,  staring very closely at mine  , im pretty sure what the-gog is referring to is the black that's printed on the glazing - it should polish off with some tcut or jif (cif?).

 

Jon 

Yes, that was what I was referring to. Glad it worked.

[Guest Phil]

Jim... give it a rest ....it looks like a 1000 therefore it is a little 1000.... end of

 

 its not like me to tell others what to think but ffs man !!

when you been on the sharp end of a 1000 come back tell me what they are like

 

 

 

Sorry Geoff but saying something is wrong like the headcode numbers is only constructive if you say how I could get them improved, what size they have to be etc.

 

Others are saying the body side grills and windows are wrong etc, but at least semi say why?

Pointing out faults is fine, but give us why and tell us , and by that I mean me, sizes etc of the real thing.

Regards

Dave

Ah, but what's really annoying is the people literally coming out of the woodwork now when comments earlier in the process (and let's be clear the models been round in various incantations for over 12 months, and I know at least 1 commentator has seem it in this time but remained silent) this could have altered the model still further to make it not just a good model but a blinking fantastic one.

 

However we now get said talking heads saying this and that after the event rather than truly being constructive during development.

Cheers

Dave

Because no one agreed with me. Besides its not QC it's cad/cam and first shot status.

QC is about 6 months too late.

Iol I guess why I'm bleating Jim is because I so wanted us to produce "the model" with very little margin for improvement and it rather irks me that I havnt. :-(

 

Mind you, if you buy one its not that bad ;-)

I don't think it's anything of the sort Simon but it's an understandable reaction to a succession of slightly acidic comments from one quarter. Please bear that in mind before lecturing.

 

Well well well. Certainly some criticism going on here off a model which has apparently been designed and developed from laser scanning technology, from one of several currently preserved examples. There appears to be an issue with the headcode boxes which "43179" has developed a fix for. Argue amongst yourselves on whether it should have been done in China or at Chirk, or left to the customer to do. The overall issue to me though is that the criticism of the model appears to be being deflected by DapolDave in suggesting that the RMweb audience, and potentially buyers of the model should have provided Dapol with more help in the development stage.

 

Yes, that appears to have been done with the D63xx which is such a cracking little model I ended up buying one, but the question is prompted - should consumers have to help a Development Manager to produce, redraw, critique, redesign and generally research the model, then receive a less than welcoming response to errors in the design, when the model is released to the retailers. I firmly believe Geoff Endacott, just like Trevor Hale, Nidge and many others with the D63xx, has tried to help Dapol with the development of the D1000.

 

It just seems sad that some people don't appear to accept the criticism of a couple of errors on the model, without dishing out the "I should know" type comments.

 

I think there seems to be a very slight undertone of irreverence coming from the Chirk direction towards a few well respected, and even more credentialed people in this hobby, which has fuelled other defence of a model which is clearly nearly right but improvable with care.

 

Although maybe not totally relevant to this thread is the concern that arguably one of the best diesel loco models (D63xx) may not be followed on by the Diesel Electric transmissioned D61xx, given DapolDave's intimation recently. For Dapol to produce (with some help) such a stunning model, then possibly abandon it's sister would be such a shame for transition modellers. I appeal to DapolDave not to allox the "class 21/29 project" to become a stillbirth.

[Michael Delamar]

IMG_7141.JPG

 

 

 

 

looks a lot better, but I still think the letters are not defined enough and are not big enough,

 

Ive photoshopped your pic (sorry) just to see if it would look better.

I think this feedback could also help Dapol, as Im sure it couldnt be all that difficult or much cost to redo the headcodes for future releases. but would they be interested in doing so?

 

the letters and numbers are very important to the look of locos fitted with headcode boxes, they are the face, or eyes of the loco.

 

my quick photoshop may not be totally accurate but I think it would transform the model if the letters/numbers where better.

 

 

 

[Enterprisingwestern]

I think I'm beginning to see why Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan et al don't come on RMweb asking for help and assistance.

 

Mike.

[Saltersbrook]

From post 601 by Phil

 

It just seems sad that some people don't appear to accept the criticism of a couple of errors on the model

 

A couple of very minor errors at that and, has been demonstrated, the major bone of contention with the headcode boxes seems easy enough to cure.

 

Model Rail's mention of the brake rigging is hardly reason not to buy it, application of a dab of glue being within the ability of all but the most inept of box openers. Why all the furore over it from the manufacturer? Nine out of ten is a good mark in anybody's book.

 

25 pages so far and a lot of that appears to be one or more members having a pop at one or more other members over differences of opinion instead of actual discussion about the loco. A loco which I also think looks excellent BTW, just I don't have a suitable BR(WR) themed layout to justify running one on.

 

Certainly what I've seen of this Western would not put me off buying other products from the same manufacturer, providing they're to a similar standard.

 

Edit, correction post 594 by Phil (Posted Yesterday, 23:47 ), the numbers appear to have changed while I was typing this..

Edited February 20, 2013 by Saltersbrook

[Guest jim s-w]

If you think the Heljan hymek is about on a par with this while the Bachmann DP1 and Hornby 60 are better. Now think about the size of their ranges and factor in this is Dapols second mainline diesel (also remember their other one is also better) its a damn good effort.

 

Ok the hymek was heljans second loco too but Bachmann had the re-hashed warship and peak before thier home brew 25 which was pretty awful. If took 3 attempts at the 37, 2 at the 40 etc all on customer feedback. As far as i am concerned Dapol has skipped all these through coming on here and hit the ground running.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited February 20, 2013 by jim s-w

[43179]

By the looks of it, the glazing should be completely clear of the black rubber surround. I'd have thought that the easiest way to do it is to make up a jig out of something like thin balsa that could slot through the vertical handrails, stick it over the headcode box with a couple of blobs of blu-tak either side, then draw round the cut-outs in the balsa with a thin black pen. (Maybe a fibre tip?) Ideally a Bob Moore lining pen if anyone has one. I wonder if someone will make up an etch for the rubber surround - attaching it will be pretty tricky, though.

 

RWJ

Morning , Out of all the options I think id prefer a nice little etch for the surrounds , although in order to fit where required it would have to be very delicate , but at least could be pre painted. and fitted with a smear of varnish. I have a bob moore pen but I'm not sure if i'd be able to do a neat enough job with it - particularly round the corners.

[BlackRat]

And as, believe it or not, I am trying to help people to improve the model, the characters are approximately 12 inches high. Precision Labels make headcodes of 4.0mm and 3.6mm. One of those sounds about right.

 

We are talking about a 3" difference here, and believe me 3" matters a lot!

 

Is that the difference in the boxes?

 

C 'mon Geoff, approximate? Sounds about right? They are either exactly right or not, and if not , theres no point to most of this thread or can we revert to the if it looks right, it is?

Edited February 20, 2013 by BlackRat