CME and Bottlewasher Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 On a side note. Kernow Model Centre have hinted that a weathered 08 and/or a BR standard brake van in weathered finish may be released as a limited edition later this year. GW. Hi GW, That sounds interesting! Let's hope that Dapol get the 08 and the BV spot on, the planked wagons, seemed a little hit and miss, when I viewed some recently..... ATB CME Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Western Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Any news on the 08? Great Western Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markeg Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 I was talking with a friend who is a member of Gauge O guild here in Australia and he had read they are now due 2014. MArk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CME and Bottlewasher Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 I was talking with a friend who is a member of Gauge O guild here in Australia and he had read they are now due 2014. MArk Early 2014? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Western Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Out of interest, does the project have a full time team working on it, or is it worked on as and when? Great Western Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CME and Bottlewasher Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Out of interest, does the project have a full time team working on it, or is it worked on as and when? Great Western Hi GW, That's a very good question. From my time in manufacturing....there would be be a cross-functional project team with members from all of the relative departments (eg. Procurement, Marketing, Manufacturing, R&D, Warehousing/Logistics and/or finance et al.) and, of course, many, many projects would be 'on-the-go' at the same time with each department and cross-finctional team playing its part, coupled with a production programme and Gant charts et al. for each product (and it's progress) - all with weekly, bi-weekly, monthly or three monthly progress/project meetings (as appropriate). From time, to time, projects would be put back or set aside, as a 'rush-job' came in, or if there were logistical or supply issues, eg. sometimes packagaing schedules (which has a similar process to the product itself when it comes to design and delivery of the end product etc.) could be out of sync with the product's schedules, there is a whole myriad of issues that could - and can - change a delivery date and the overall lead-times for a product... I hope that sheds a little light, yet of course each company/organisation has it's own way of doing things. Kind regards, CME Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfsboy Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 I agree with CME .When I worked in the electronics industry on Line Production and also ran the coilwinding shop way back when , all would run smooth until the dreaded" important ,urgent,very urgent, must be right first time ,drop everything , dont worry about overtime ,etc,Mr blah Blah insists this must be put through asap " came along and then it all went out of the window .Manufacturing often isnt a smooth A to B journey ,often its via C and even Z. and thats before a shipment goes missing or gets washed of deck .I ended up as Progress Chaser with a headache. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DapolDave Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Hi guys, Something's that have cropped up in China during chassis testing that i'd like opinions on please? please forgive the older wagons and track you see in the pictures but the problem and possible cure is still the same. Overun on points, curves and 'S' bends in track systems (facing points etc), causing potential buffer lock. As you can see we are proposing a customer fitted metal 3 link chain as per normal but also a customer fitted alternate high strength plastic fixed chain that will pivot at angles on the hook to keep the trailing tank or rolling stock at a set distance. Not a great design but simple, and it has so far proved quite effective. Therefore can I have your thoughts please? Cheers Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CME and Bottlewasher Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Hi guys, Something's that have cropped up in China during chassis testing that i'd like opinions on please? please forgive the older wagons and track you see in the pictures but the problem and possible cure is still the same. Overun on points, curves and 'S' bends in track systems (facing points etc), causing potential buffer lock. As you can see we are proposing a customer fitted metal 3 link chain as per normal but also a customer fitted alternate high strength plastic fixed chain that will pivot at angles on the hook to keep the trailing tank or rolling stock at a set distance. Not a great design but simple, and it has so far proved quite effective. Therefore can I have your thoughts please? Cheers Dave Hi Dave, This is in haste.... What is the radius of the reverse ('S') curve, points etc. and how severe is it (it looks very sharp to my eyes)? I know that I mentioned that you guys should cater for sharper, than the GOG recommended 6' radius curves, and that such should be taken into account (Peco are to bring out set curves and points soonish), yet I dont think that many modellers, even if using 4' radius, will put in sharp reverse curves as such is asking for trouble and most wagons should traverse, by and large, 4' curves anyway - with the exception perhaps of 6 wheelers. Are you testing them on bog standard Peco track/points too (which is what most modellers will be using - I think that the radius for the Peco set track point and curves is an open secret)? Can you elaborate? I am just about to set up a reverse curve on our outdoor section (when measured although looking sharp the curve/reverse curve was in fact 5' 6" - 6' radius) and I will need to test for buffer lock (yet the reverse curve is quite extended so such shouldnt be an issue). I think that plastic 3 links is innovative and if supplied alongside of metal 3 links would be a boon for other reasons too (ie wont become magnetised when used with various auto-coupling systems that use magnets etc) also steel 3 links are in short supply - hopefully you can make the plastic versions strong/resilient enough (they may help in setting up 'cuts' of wagons too if sold separately), yet I am wondering if such are - really - needed for most applications anyway. Kind regards, CME Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share Posted July 8, 2013 I like it... simple but effective, although I assume it would be easily removeable for the purists who want to use 'proper' 3 links? Like CME, I'd be interested to know what radius you are using on the test track. Although 6ft is the recommended Guild minimum, 4ft is common particularly in low speed yards (exactly the sort of place where the problems you are experiencing occur) however the Ixion Manning Wardle I think can cope with 3ft curves? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 I've not had any problems with ordinary 3-links on Gough's yard and that uses 4' radius marcway points for the crosswover. That said, if the rigid plastic couplings are cheap enough to produce then by all means put them in the box! I think I'd like to see the ordinary metal 3-links fitted as standard ... and unlike the 5/7/8 plank wagons, would it be possible to have them blackened? I've replaced the silver ones with peco couplings, but it was a bit of a pain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share Posted July 8, 2013 The one in the picture looks like the output from a 3D printer to me, although I would guess mass-produced plastic mouldings would be cheaper. Agree with the "blackened" comment for the metal ones. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CME and Bottlewasher Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Hi all, I think that we need some clarification on the track being used. CN and Jack, your comments ring very true. Kind regards, CME Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Hi Dave, A few years ago, I had a family friend, since deceased, who had a massive O gauge layout in his loft, developed over many years, that used mainly Bassett Lowke locos and Exley coaches, plus similar manufacturers of that era, and a lot of scratch built stock to those standards. The wheels were "steamroller" standard. The commercially made 3 rail track was very coarse and the curves were a tight radius for o gauge. I'm not too sure now but they were maybe getting on for 3 ft radius. The couplings used on the Exley etc. stock involved a coupling hook with an inverted channel section bar pivoted from it. A slot in the other end of the inverted bar dropped over the coupling hook on the next wagon/coach to form a rigid coupling. This was definitely needed if stock had to be propelled round some of the tight curves or occasional s bend. Crude but it worked, like all of that coarser than coarse scale standard of long long ago. imho your "rigid 3 link coupling" should work very well, even on Lionel track, from my own experience of many hours "playing trains" with something similar. However, as has been said above in this thread, current o gauge modellers are likely to use far finer, nearer to scale standards, and won't go for very tight curves. But go for it, it's a brilliant idea. . Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium boxbrownie Posted July 9, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 9, 2013 Dave, I think this is a great idea for a production model, I have seen similar being used but they have been custom made. It is simple and a very elegant solution and I hope you make the rigid links available seperately also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 ...Therefore can I have your thoughts please?... This sort of pivotted bar is well proven. The only caveat is that it should not be 'sprung' out of the hook by a bump, propelled or pulled. A slight deviation from prototype in the form of a notch at the rear of the drawhook matching the link diameter to positively retain the coupler when pressure is applied should prevent this. It will work equally well in 4mm... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagpipes331 Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Hi Dave, Great idea, simple ideas are usually the best!! I may be sticking my head above the parapet, but were milk tankers fitted with screw couplings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Hi Dave, Great idea, simple ideas are usually the best!! I may be sticking my head above the parapet, but were milk tankers fitted with screw couplings? Yes, they were. My copy of "BR General and parcels rolling stock" by David Larkin has 18 pics of 6 wheel milk tankers, ex GWR, LMS, SR, LNER, BR standard and they all have screw link couplings. A rigid "mock" screw link coupling would therefore be good - thinking about it, could work for oo gauge as well (expect it's already been done, though!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CME and Bottlewasher Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Yes, they were. My copy of "BR General and parcels rolling stock" by David Larkin has 18 pics of 6 wheel milk tankers, ex GWR, LMS, SR, LNER, BR standard and they all have screw link couplings. A rigid "mock" screw link coupling would therefore be good - thinking about it, could work for oo gauge as well (expect it's already been done, though!) Agreed fellas, I couldnt thnik what was missing in this 'motion picture' than last evening it struck me that as high speed vehicles they were fitted with screw-links. I would have thought that a ridged three-link and screw-link - as a reasonably priced accs. - would be useful. I expect that we wont hear back from Dave for a while he's probably flown off to even sunnier climes so as to kick some 'supplier-butt' over this matter LOL!! ATVB CME Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 I'm after a few and if there not supplied would probably change the couplings to screw link. Can any one confirm if it hasn't already What prototype are these based on ? Would the MMB be suitable for the late 50s early 60s? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjnewitt Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 The Dapol models are based on the early/middle period LMS D.1994s. The later lots built in the 1940s had a slightly different underframe. The predominant livery in the 1950'60s was black underframe and silver tanks but you could find M.M.B (and C.W.S Ltd) tanks still in blue (or red) into the late 1960s. There's are a picture on Paul Bartlett's website: http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lmsmilk/h2f6286a5#h2f6286a5 There's also a picture in BR General Parcels Rolling Stock - A Pictorial Survey by David Larkin of a blue liveried LMS D.1994 taken in 1970. Just to echo what has already been said milk tanks were NPCS and, as such, all had screw couplings. Having looked at the cad/cam's on the previous page have the fictional lifting links on the brakegear been removed and the tie bars altered to the correct type? Justin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 What's the news with the 08 any confirmed delivery dates yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromptonnut Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 http://Dapol.co.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=179_298_299_328 "Anticipated release date February 2014". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dava Posted August 10, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 10, 2013 Any update on the delivery timescale for the Beattie well tank they are doing for Kernow? Is this 2014 as well? Dava Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adrianbs Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Hi All Its me again !! I have noted the proposed rigid 3 link coupling which is intended to prevent buffer locking but it does state " prevent buffer locking on OVER-RUN " on sharp or reverse curves. It does NOT state that it will prevent buffer locking when PROPELLING vehicles on sharp or reverse curves. This idea will NOT prevent buffer locking under these conditions, indeed it will almost certainly cause immediate derailment. The physics of it just do not stack up if we assume the reverse curves, normally found at crossovers but sometimes elsewhere are of the same tight radius as shown in the image illustrating the "Normal 3 link coupling" I note the rigid coupling is only shown with both vehicles on straight track !! Since the main cause of buffer locking is when vehicles are beng PROPELLD, and it is a solution to this problem that will be needed, if modellers insist on using such tight radii I see little point in pursuing the Idea. If modellers never wish to reverse their stock over crossovers, or along set track where straight joins sharp radius curve,, all well and good, but that will be a rather limiting factor on running a model railway. Another contributor refers to the old "Rigid link" system used on TOY TRAINS such as mid period Hornby, Bassett-Lowke et al This does indeed work but the physics are quite a lot different because the coupling hooks themsleves are pivotted well behind the buffer beam and the link is designed to rigidise the two hooks together thus creating effectively a coupling bar between the two vehicles with pivot centres at a fairly large distance. The larger this distance the better it works up to a point. Even this system was not particularly effective but it did work Many modellers do use rigid 3 link/dummy scew couplings, Ken Payne to name just one, but this is simply to ease uncoupling and coupling of corridor stock and the buffers are still operational to prevent locking, perhaps Dapol could show us how well this works when propelling with a short video ????? I am not sure quite which market Dapol are aiming at as they are apparently trying to please the coarse scale tinplate toy train collector as well as the finescale rivet counter brigade. At present they are falling between two stools and they will soon have to make their minds up which to cater for. Perhaps the option of coarse scale wheels and provision for couplings compatible with those used by Ace or Hornby O would be a good idea. Hoping to get a reply Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.