O Gauge 08

[edcayton]

Nothing wrong with that post Adrian

 

Ed

[Talltim]

 Because of the apparent tie up whereby Dapol make N gauge versions of Hornby 4mm models, I had rather assumed the O8 would have been derived from the information and files used for the Hornby model.  Perhaps the files were not detailed enough but there seems to have been general approval of the Hornby version.

I don;t follow these things that closely so I wasn't aware of any Hornby-Dapol link. However Hornby seems to moving into N with their Arnold brand, so perhaps any link has been broken

[raymw]

BTW can anyone who is PC literate help me? The latest version of Firefox wont let me apply 'spell check' (in short it isnt there) and now, when using Google Chrome, when typing here, all of the facilities in the Header-bar are 'greyed out' (the type face is like that of an old typewriter - although it looks normal when Posted) - at least spell-check works.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

ATVB

 

CME

probably top lh button of header bar - 'bbc code' - hit that

[woodenhead]

I don;t follow these things that closely so I wasn't aware of any Hornby-Dapol link. However Hornby seems to moving into N with their Arnold brand, so perhaps any link has been broken

That link has been mentioned a few times but there is no known commercial agreement between Hornby and Dapol to share data.  

 

The truth is more likely that Dapol can see gaps in the market they can exploit because generally Bachmann won't model something in N they cannot also do in OO so if it exists in Hornby's stable then it is likely to sell in N and unlikely to be done by Bachmann.  Of course there are exceptions to the rule but if you look at most of Graham Farish's newer output there are 4mm siblings.

[brian daniels]

Problem is they may have brought Brian in as consultant by will they listen to him?  The latest big diesel (40) has some pretty visible errors around the cab area which should have not even got through CAD stage they seem so obvious in photos.

 

Brian knows his prototype stuff inside out and as a modeller I think anyone would struggle to equal his skills in modern image, but Heljan need to listen and then act upon the advice but unfotunately I feel it is still "just a business" to Heljan.

 

As with all manufacturers I think I said this before "you can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink". Changing pre-production models costs money, lots of it and at the end of the day you can say if company XYZ spends £20'000+ altering a tooling will it amount to more sales? Usually the answer is no, people will still buy the model because if you want a particular model then you get it despite any problems because that's all you have. At the end of the day it is a business for Heljan, no one there is a railway enthusiast (probably obvious if you have talked to them at a show!) Even I miss some things! Recently it's been a bit of a mare what with wagons and class 60/42/53/25/45 cad and colour layouts to look over and I do still have a full time job (some would argue over that though working on the railways  ) and I do still like to do some modelling which you probably have noticed has slowed down recently. There are a couple of other people involved over here not just me thankfully. I can see the point of view from both sides of these arguments. In an ideal world the model would and should be 100% right at the cad stage.

[edcayton]

As with all manufacturers I think I said this before "you can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink". Changing pre-production models costs money, lots of it and at the end of the day you can say if company XYZ spends £20'000+ altering a tooling will it amount to more sales? Usually the answer is no, people will still buy the model because if you want a particular model then you get it despite any problems because that's all you have. At the end of the day it is a business for Heljan, no one there is a railway enthusiast (probably obvious if you have talked to them at a show!) Even I miss some things! Recently it's been a bit of a mare what with wagons and class 60/42/53/25/45 cad and colour layouts to look over and I do still have a full time job (some would argue over that though working on the railways  ) and I do still like to do some modelling which you probably have noticed has slowed down recently. There are a couple of other people involved over here not just me thankfully. I can see the point of view from both sides of these arguments. In an ideal world the model would and should be 100% right at the cad stage.

 

I would argue that no model can ever be "100% right", and that at some stage someone has to say "that's enough", whether it be rtr, kit or scratch-build.

 

Ed

[31A]

I don;t follow these things that closely so I wasn't aware of any Hornby-Dapol link. However Hornby seems to moving into N with their Arnold brand, so perhaps any link has been broken

 

I'm not sure that there is a link (and I'm not an N gauge modeller myself) but I couldn't help but notice when they started their N gauge range a lot of the items produced were already in the Hornby 00 range.  In the case of the Gresley corridor coaches, the Dapol items included the same errors as the original Hornby versions, i.e. tank filler pipes on one end only of the TK and FK coaches (correct only for the BCK), and filler pipes and communication cord gear on the wrong end in the case of the Buffet Car, which seems surprisingly coincidental as such errors shouldn't arise from using information relating to the real vehicles.

[Not Captain Kernow]

The main thing is that this model is clearly at CAD stage, so changes can be made.  It is pretty pointless waiting to point out errors in a model which is already tooled and about to start production.  It is not surprising that a manufacturer cannot make changes at a late stage, but they really should be able to make corrections at this stage.  As long as you point them out politely

[CME and Bottlewasher]

As with all manufacturers I think I said this before "you can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink". Changing pre-production models costs money, lots of it and at the end of the day you can say if company XYZ spends £20'000+ altering a tooling will it amount to more sales? Usually the answer is no, people will still buy the model because if you want a particular model then you get it despite any problems because that's all you have. At the end of the day it is a business for Heljan, no one there is a railway enthusiast (probably obvious if you have talked to them at a show!) Even I miss some things! Recently it's been a bit of a mare what with wagons and class 60/42/53/25/45 cad and colour layouts to look over and I do still have a full time job (some would argue over that though working on the railways  ) and I do still like to do some modelling which you probably have noticed has slowed down recently. There are a couple of other people involved over here not just me thankfully. I can see the point of view from both sides of these arguments. In an ideal world the model would and should be 100% right at the cad stage.

Thanks Brian - I am sure that I can speak for others here and say we understand, your efforts are appreciated.

 

 

I would argue that no model can ever be "100% right", and that at some stage someone has to say "that's enough", whether it be rtr, kit or scratch-build.

 

Ed

 

Also with different materials and different scales and gauges, nothing will 'scale down' perfectly, so the remainder is down to 'stage craft' and making the model look 'right' rather than perfect accuracy, that's where the real skill comes into play.

 

I'm not sure that there is a link (and I'm not an N gauge modeller myself) but I couldn't help but notice when they started their N gauge range a lot of the items produced were already in the Hornby 00 range.  In the case of the Gresley corridor coaches, the Dapol items included the same errors as the original Hornby versions, i.e. tank filler pipes on one end only of the TK and FK coaches (correct only for the BCK), and filler pipes and communication cord gear on the wrong end in the case of the Buffet Car, which seems surprisingly coincidental as such errors shouldn't arise from using information relating to the real vehicles.

Interesting, so do you think that Hornby sell on CAD data, or is something else at play?

 

 

The main thing is that this model is clearly at CAD stage, so changes can be made.  It is pretty pointless waiting to point out errors in a model which is already tooled and about to start production.  It is not surprising that a manufacturer cannot make changes at a late stage, but they really should be able to make corrections at this stage.  As long as you point them out politely

Indeed. As long as Dapol 'listen' things can be put right now, but that didnt happen with the 6 wheelers, the POW's and the Pillbox though.

 

ATVB to one and all,

 

CME

[Loconuts]

As with all manufacturers I think I said this before "you can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink". Changing pre-production models costs money, lots of it and at the end of the day you can say if company XYZ spends £20'000+ altering a tooling will it amount to more sales? Usually the answer is no, people will still buy the model because if you want a particular model then you get it despite any problems because that's all you have. At the end of the day it is a business for Heljan, no one there is a railway enthusiast (probably obvious if you have talked to them at a show!) Even I miss some things! Recently it's been a bit of a mare what with wagons and class 60/42/53/25/45 cad and colour layouts to look over and I do still have a full time job (some would argue over that though working on the railways  ) and I do still like to do some modelling which you probably have noticed has slowed down recently. There are a couple of other people involved over here not just me thankfully. I can see the point of view from both sides of these arguments. In an ideal world the model would and should be 100% right at the cad stage.

Hi Brian, do you still work?  Thats a first.  As a design engineer using 3D CAD I can tell you that sometimes things may not look right when viewed due to the viewing angle but could be right.  It all depends on the quality of the graphic card, in other words what one sees can be misleading.

My argument is, why do manufacturers put these drawings into the public domain and then ignore or complain about criticism.  Would it not be better to announce a forth coming model and then produce a preproduction prototype.  Alright mistakes could be made but that is up to the manufacturer to make sure they get it right.

They would soon find out if they made mistakes, the modeler is not stupid and does not have unlimited funds, they would soon vote with their feet and wallets.

 

Loconuts

[The Stationmaster]

Hi All  I wll have one more go although probably my last on this site.     Because of the apparent errors?  picked up by others I wonder if they have realised that this means that the profile of the bonnet top will be similarly affected ?  To me it looks much too flat on top, indeed flatter than the original CADs.  I wonder why the original Laser scan was unusable assuming it was still available and the original CADs were, I assume, still on file anyway.  Whilst they lacked some details they seemed more accurate as far as the general shape was concerned and did not have the oversize step between bonnet and cab roof.  

      (snipped)

               Regards all  adrianbs

Much better put if I may so Adrian and I think you are probably very much on target as I certainly see the new CAD as something of a 'bitsa' (bitsa this and bitsa that) and I wonder if the original has been altered to include/exclude various features and has become distorted (is that possible?) somewhere in the process so you get oddities such as teh external battery switch cubicle (unless anyone can produce earlier evidence of its presence?)c.

 

In that respect it reflects - or could reflect - what seems to have happened with the CADs for the GW streamlined railcar where various features suggest the originally announced model and it's almost as if it has been altered in parts (but not everywhere) to get nearer to a later batch.

 

There is a lot to be said for scanning or measuring of an existing example of something which ran about years ago but it is useless to do so unless those taking the detail forwrad to teh CAD stage understand what might have happened, and why, between real railway life and today's preserved railway etc life.

[adrianbs]

Hi  All  Totally agree with Brian D about horses ( Donkeys ?) and water and sometimes leading is not perhaps the right approach if nothing is happening.  A good kick up the backside might get things moving, that's my experience anyway although the kick is metaphorical.  When initially acceptable CADs are changed for ones with serious errors but are not posted where you expect to find them and pre-pro models then appear with these errors  ( as per the Kernow O2)  there is no chance to help, even politely, and that is where the kick up the backside may work but not always I am afraid..  Similarly when a series of models is announced and just before release the entire range is changed for a completely different set of models with many errors and retailers are not even aware of the changes until after they have dispatched the models it is only to be expected that there will be a certain amount of complaint, both by customers and presumably retailers  ( A good example being the Dapol SR Pillbox brakevan )

 

      As Brian says, some firms are run by people with little knowledge of the prototype and they are easily lulled into believing a model is OK even if those advising are not as well qualified as they should be.  Some designers know their limitations, none of us have the sort of expertise that ensures every error on every model is identified with a quick glance or even a whole day spent studying reference material.  A second and third opinion may well spot an error and it may be a very major one . Richard Webster admitted he needed help and it was given because he was not so egotistical that he believed he could do the work unaided.  I am well aware that some manufacturers get help from amateurs but they may not be experts in quite the right field. They may be able to provide photos and drawings but may not have the professional approach to spotting errors. Naturally someone who has already designed and produced a model is likely to have a much better in depth knowledge of that prototype than someone who has only an interest in buying one. They may even be willing to assist although asking them to cut their own throat for someones else benefit is hardly likely to be well received.   In this case some sort of financial inducement might be needed and might even be accepted if it outweighed the likely profit remaining to be made, or the model was to a different scale. 

.

     If there is not a commercial tie up between Hornby and Dapol one can only assume that the extraordinary coincidences between the models arises for another reason. It may be that there was some agreement but it only related to the 4mm range of models that Dapol sold to Hornby and that Dapol were allowed to use the information they already had from Airfix and the in-house Dapol models, but only for N gauge products.  It certainly seems to be the case that the models Dapol sold to Hornby are the subjects of shrinking to N gauge in many cases but not in the case of the Gresley coaches.

     Regards all  adrianbs

[BR_Blue_1986]

Having asked Dapol recently on facebook, they said they are pushing this as hard as they can and hope to start tooling January time.

[boxbrownie]

Having asked Dapol recently on facebook, they said they are pushing this as hard as they can and hope to start tooling January time.

 

Next time your on FaecesBook any chance of asking them to participate in the forum, I certainly have no access to FB (and neither wish to) but I am sure the forum would be far better platform for them.

[brianthesnail96]

Unfortunately I suspect there simply aren't enough hours in the day to do so- previous attempts at poking heads above parapets resulted in nothing more than a barrage of flak that would have proved almost impossible and certainly impractical to try and deflect, cue heads dissapearing again and retreating to more easily defended positions... 

 

It's a shame, because it could be a very beneficial relationship to both parties (as indeed it was when Dave was at Dapol, and still is with his current venture), but I rather fear we (as the RMWeb collective) abused it somewhat with our enthusiasm to slate Dapol's efforts and have lost the opportunity.

[adrianbs]

Hi all   Not too sure I like the sound of what  BR Blue 1986 said about Dapol pushing the O8 as fast as possible into tooling for Jan 2015.  So far the only steps they seem to have made to complete the model seem to have been backward over the past 2 years or more.  Maybe they do believe that it will still sell well enough in it's present state and they have no intention of listening to criticism or spending any more money on retooling. Seems to have worked for them on the previous O gauge models if you believe what they say and the fact that the number of POW liveries is fast approaching 100 with only a marginal upgrade? to the models themselves. Even if many of the variants are only batches of 25 they must have produced over on 4000 models. That's a fair old turnover in a relatively short space of time with only a minimal expenditure on tooling and almost nothing on the minimal upgrade.  They made no attempt to upgrade the milk tankers indeed they did the opposite by leaving off the solebar lettering and only minor changes were made to the brakevan.

  I am afraid we may be " hoist with our own petard "  having bought such large numbers of previous models Dapol may well believe they can sell enough models of the O8 without adding or subtracting a single rivet no matter what criticisms are posted and they can move on to the next model to a similar  standard.   Regards all  adrianbs

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Hi Brian, do you still work?  Thats a first.  As a design engineer using 3D CAD I can tell you that sometimes things may not look right when viewed due to the viewing angle but could be right.  It all depends on the quality of the graphic card, in other words what one sees can be misleading.

My argument is, why do manufacturers put these drawings into the public domain and then ignore or complain about criticism.  Would it not be better to announce a forth coming model and then produce a preproduction prototype.  Alright mistakes could be made but that is up to the manufacturer to make sure they get it right.

They would soon find out if they made mistakes, the modeler is not stupid and does not have unlimited funds, they would soon vote with their feet and wallets.

 

Loconuts

By and large I agree, but as ABS says, the sales of the POW's only encourage Dapol to churn out more of the same, as people have NOT voted with their feet/wallets, sadly IMHO.

 

Unfortunately I suspect there simply aren't enough hours in the day to do so- previous attempts at poking heads above parapets resulted in nothing more than a barrage of flak that would have proved almost impossible and certainly impractical to try and deflect, cue heads dissapearing again and retreating to more easily defended positions... 

 

It's a shame, because it could be a very beneficial relationship to both parties (as indeed it was when Dave was at Dapol, and still is with his current venture), but I rather fear we (as the RMWeb collective) abused it somewhat with our enthusiasm to slate Dapol's efforts and have lost the opportunity.

Dapol are in business, IMHHO, they should man-up, grow some and take the 'flak', it's what's called customer service, these days, so I am told. I agree it would be a good relationship though, but Dapol dont seem very good, culturally, at business relationship management, within or outwith. I am not sure that anyone abused the relationship as such, just that Dapol went to ground anyway. As a business I think that they are struggling. BTW they wouldnt have to 'defend' their position if they got their models right LOL! I am sure as big boys and girls Dapol should be able to take the 'slatings' that's the nature of business, sad but true.

 

Hi all   Not too sure I like the sound of what  BR Blue 1986 said about Dapol pushing the O8 as fast as possible into tooling for Jan 2015.  So far the only steps they seem to have made to complete the model seem to have been backward over the past 2 years or more.  Maybe they do believe that it will still sell well enough in it's present state and they have no intention of listening to criticism or spending any more money on retooling. Seems to have worked for them on the previous O gauge models if you believe what they say and the fact that the number of POW liveries is fast approaching 100 with only a marginal upgrade? to the models themselves. Even if many of the variants are only batches of 25 they must have produced over on 4000 models. That's a fair old turnover in a relatively short space of time with only a minimal expenditure on tooling and almost nothing on the minimal upgrade.  They made no attempt to upgrade the milk tankers indeed they did the opposite by leaving off the solebar lettering and only minor changes were made to the brakevan.

  I am afraid we may be " foist with our own petard "  having bought such large numbers of previous models Dapol may well believe they can sell enough models of the O8 without adding or subtracting a single rivet no matter what criticisms are posted and they can move on to the next model to a similar  standard.   Regards all  adrianbs

I have not purchased any of their 7mm products (to date), due to informed buying decisions that came about, for me, from the relavant Threads I read or contributed to. On the other hand you have purchased their products       - so you are all to blame, the Temple has fallen and we are all entombed and doooomed LOL!!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo

[Loconuts]

By and large I agree, but as ABS says, the sales of the POW's only encourage Dapol to churn out more of the same, as people have NOT voted with their feet/wallets, sadly IMHO.

 

Dapol are in business, IMHHO, they should man-up, grow some and take the 'flak', it's what's called customer service, these days, so I am told. I agree it would be a good relationship though, but Dapol dont seem very good, culturally, at business relationship management, within or outwith. I am not sure that anyone abused the relationship as such, just that Dapol went to ground anyway. As a business I think that they are struggling. BTW they wouldnt have to 'defend' their position if they got their models right LOL! I am sure as big boys and girls Dapol should be able to take the 'slatings' that's the nature of business, sad but true.

 

I have not purchased any of their 7mm products (to date), due to informed buying decisions that came about, for me, from the relavant Threads I read or contributed to. On the other hand you have purchased their products       - so you are all to blame, the Temple has fallen and we are all entombed and doooomed LOL!!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo

Are the Dapol POW's being purchased, as I have wandered around the shows I have seen large quantities of Dapol POW's for sale at huge discounted prices, a big hit for the retailers. yes Dapol have made their money.  Already the Terrier is being discounted and that model has not arrived yet.

I spoke with Brian Daniels last night about the Heljan set up and he informed me that the CAD's are being done in China and are then sent to Heljan for checking and approval.  Heljan do not have a copy of the CAD package and use a free downloadable viewer to look at the 3D models.  How are they able to the interrogate 3D model, you cannot do it with a viewer.

The trouble with 3D packages is you cannot backdate a model, so producing a model on a 2012 package can be viewed and interrogated on a 2014 package, however that model cannot be opened on the 2012 package.

What needs to be done is to convert the 3D model in China to a Autocad 2D drawing and saved as a 2000 version.  That way the drawing can be opened on any year version of an Autocad package viewed and checked, any changes can be made here and saving the drawing back as a 2000 version it can then be opened in China complete with modifications.  The 3D model can then be corrected.

The thing is a Autocad LT package cost just a few hundred pounds as opposed to several thousands of pounds for a 3D modeling package which has to be up dated every year. Simples!

I hope that by using this method of working will help remove some of the errors.

 

Loconuts

[Great Western]

Terrier being discounted ? Any you say where please.......£159 at the last look....

 

Great Western

[raymw]

On Tower models site, Dapol Terrier/08  rrp is £199.95

[The Stationmaster]

Might be lots of big Dapol discounts at Warley this weekend as they are doing some bargain basement special offers to traders at the show according to my spy (but not to regular retail customers who aren't going to be there).

[Andy Y]

(but not to regular retail customers who aren't going to be there).

 

Aah; so that was the catch.

[boxbrownie]

 

the CAD's are being done in China and are then sent to Heljan for checking and approval.  Heljan do not have a copy of the CAD package and use a free downloadable viewer to look at the 3D models.

 

Loconuts

 

    :laugh:

 

(Speechless!)

[BR_Blue_1986]

Actually, I tell a lie, here is a response to someone who also commented on my post in Dapols facebook page:

 

"Hi Chris, we are now really pushing this as hard as we can. we are hoping it will be going into tooling before Christmas so should see a mid 2015 release"

[brian daniels]

    :laugh:

 

(Speechless!)

 

Don't panic Heljan are not that bad! Loconuts got it a bit wrong what I said on the phone last night.