O gauge Milk tankers

[adrianbs]

Hi Coniston branch, I think Hornby's mongrel was a cross between an E2 and a Jinty. Still not very convincing nevertheless . adrianbs

[Ryde-on-time]

I have found there seems to be a large number of modellers encouraging Dapol to continue making innaccurate models. They do their best to discredit anyone who wishes to see better models and point out errors

I will just bang another nail in the milk tank coffin, the lettering "Shunt with care" is in the wrong place !! Is that a necessity I wonder??

 

Regards all adrianbs

Perhaps because all we see from some posters is negativity. Sometimes feels a bit like watching someone being kicked  when the're already down?

 

Take your posting as an example. Absolutely no credit given to Dapol for actually spelling "Shunt with care" correctly 

[peter220950]

 

The brake van was wrong because it had mistakes which it was too late to correct, so they claimed.

 

On that subject Adrian, whose was the equally inaccurate kit that you alluded to elsewhere?

[adrianbs]

Hi peter220950 I did not say that the kit was equally as bad as the Dapol model, what I said was that the Dapol model had the same errors as the kit but that Dapol had made other errors all of their own ( A significant number in fact ) Please stop putting words into my posts which were not there. Many others insist on making claims that I said things which I did not in an attempt to discredit me and now I find you are joining them. Please read posts 72 and 73 again to ensure you have fully understood what I said otherwise you may find the moderator telling you off. ( He's very fierce I'll have you know !! ) The standards of other kits are not the subject of this forum but I am sure you can work it out for yourself. Regards adrianbs

Edited August 21, 2014 by adrianbs

[adrianbs]

Hi Ryde-on-time Do you have X-ray eyes ?? I can't see all the letters and the Tower photo is of the other side!! All I can see is SH--T which could give the Chinese the option of quite a few words. !! Best wait till the models arrive, we don't want people jumpimg to conclusions as to the ability of Dapol to get it right, Regards adrianbs

[peter220950]

Hi peter220950 I did not say that the kit was equally as bad as the Dapol model, what I said was that the Dapol model had the same errors as the kit but that Dapol had made other errors all of their own ( A significant number in fact ) Please stop putting words into my posts which were not there. Many others insist on making claims that I said things which I did not in an attempt to discredit me and now I find you are joining them. Please read posts 72 and 73 again to ensure you have fully understood what I said otherwise you may find the moderator telling you off. ( He's very fierce I'll have you know !! ) The standards of other kits are not the subject of this forum but I am sure you can work it out for yourself. Regards adrianbs

 No intention to discredit Adrian,  you obviously have extensive knowledge on subject, but only want to share some of it, that's your prerogative.

 

I just thought you had said it had been 'copied, warts and all' and took that to mean it shared the same faults, and therefore erroneously thought you meant it was similar, apologies if that was not the case.  I just wanted to avoid buying the wrong one, but as you seem reluctant to tell me which one it is I have to take pot luck. As you were so generous with sharing your thoughts on the errors in one product I thought you might at least be inclined to tell me something of the other one, I was obviously mistaken.

Edited August 21, 2014 by peter220950

[Ryde-on-time]

Hi Ryde-on-time Do you have X-ray eyes ?? I can't see all the letters and the Tower photo is of the other side!! All I can see is SH--T which could give the Chinese the option of quite a few words. !! Best wait till the models arrive, we don't want people jumpimg to conclusions as to the ability of Dapol to get it right, Regards adrianbs

Appologies

 

I understand now your reticence to praise

 

Perhaps we could run a book on what we think they've printed. I'll kick off with "Shift with care"

[adrianbs]

Hi all That's one I thought of, but I could think of another if we were to assume there is only one letter missing !! adrianbs

Edited August 21, 2014 by adrianbs

[90164]

This is to ignore the great numbers of people who like model railways but cant/wont /dont want to build a kit ,paint it ,and run it .They want something they can put on a layout /table top/carpet .They just enjoy trains .

Nothing wrong with this, but why follow this approach in 0 gauge? It would be much easier and cheaper to do it in 00.

[two tone green]

So who was in charge of design and quality two years ago at Dapol if things were wrong back then.

 

If the CAD is two years old the research and early design work must be older to allow the CAD to be created.  

Just spotted who started this thread and the date it was started. Maybe answers my own question.

[two tone green]

Then the said same person could well have been responsible for the SR brake van and POW wagons ?

[peter220950]

Nothing wrong with this, but why follow this approach in 0 gauge? It would be much easier and cheaper to do it in 00.

 

Think it's something to do with freedom of choice.

[gardenwall]

O over oo

Think it's something to do with freedom of choice.

or eyesight, or as was pointed out previously, prefering the 'presence' of the larger scale.

[Simond]

Notwithstanding the discussion about freedom of choice and personal preferences, it seems to me that it is, in general, as expensive for a manufacturer to make an accurate model as a generic / inaccurate one. Whether this is the case with Dapol's milk tankers I cannot say, but it is likely to be the case, I believe.

 

As an example, I'm pretty sure a set of Slater's S7 wheels are, within a percent or so, the same material cost as a set of their coarse scale ones, and their fine scale ones too.

 

The price won't be the same if course, because there are investment costs and overheads to be recovered, and the recovery of these will depend on how many of the item can be sold, and some other factors, such as accepting lower margins on some products, as they affect the sale of other products, in a way that is expected to more than compensate.

 

So, if an inaccurate model will satisfy one group of customers, and a more accurate model will satisfy both that group, and a further, but possibly limited group, and if the difference in sales can be translated into profit margin for the manufacturer, it would seem not only a shame, but poor business sense, not to take the opportunity to appeal to the widest possible marketplace.

 

Of course, there may be many reasons why this is not valid in this case, I cannot expect to know, but it remains, in my opinion, a shame.

 

Simon

[gardenwall]

Then the said same person could well have been responsible for the SR brake van and POW wagons ?

Time will tell, but my reading between the lines suggests a fair degree of 'interesting times' in the chineses sense (how appropriate!) and maybe a bit of one hand tied.  

 

The jump from the frying pan has now been well and truely made, and the forging in the fire well underway, but not complete, with a whole new set of challenges to meet.   Current occupants of the frying pan have yet to show any clean run product  (8 wagons announced with a statement that CAD/ prototypes be shown would be shown early 2014 - we are well beyond that!) however delays are endemic for all the manufacturers so it's hardly a total surprise, and in the end what does appear is what counts. The jury is still out.

[two tone green]

Nicely put GW.

[adrianbs]

Hi All Simond is correct in terms of making an accurate model being as cheap as an innaccurate one PROVIDED that the competance of the researcher/designer/toolmaker team is such that the correct information has been gathered and used correctly FIRST TIME. The costs should actually be less, in fact, as there will not be any additional costs redesigning the model to make it different to the prototype.

 

Making mistakes and having to redo work really does cost, especially if it involves significant retooling. Dapol's claims that they have "Gone Generic" to save money look rather hollow when you realise the following. They have had to tool up for a new wheel size just for this model when existing wheels from the brakevan could have been used with a GWR tank. They may have plans to do coaches or vans later, using 3' 6.5" wheels, but the costs are set against the milk tank. The Tower photo shows a wagon with a different cradle design which must have cost extra but for a "GENERIC" wagon is hardly necessary. Had they been planning to do LMS fitted vans in their series of " 8 new wagons ", some of which might also have 3' 6.5" wheels they will now have the wheels in production but alas the necessary brakeshoe units will not be available as they have chosen to do the GWR design instead of the correct LMS version. Additionally the GWR brakeshoes tooling will not be much use in the future unless they have some rather specialised models in mind.

 

They have, it appears, used the same buffers as the POWs which are ugly chunky things and the wrong length for milk tanks, as modellers will find when they couple them up using the screw couplings. These will leave huge gaps between vehicles which should, of course, have the buffers touching, that is why screw couplings are used in real life of course. With RW in charge I am surprised his excellent buffer design was not used on the tanks as, although it would require new tooling, it will be needed shortly for the fitted opens and vans which must surely be in the pipeline if the range is to continue. The cost of the screw couplings will have increased production costs although it would have been welcomed if only the buffers had been the right length.

 

Had they used the GWR design earlier D/C brakegear the tooling would have been simpler and cheaper and much more of a match for the rest of the underframe. Both sides would then have been identical and would not have needed two different Tampo printing plates to do the solebar lettering. It looks at the moment as if they have NOT made two plates with the result that the lettering on one side is "SH--T WITH CARE" under the brake lever instead of well to the left.

 

My feeling is that shortcuts have been taken in the reseach and the design has been approved with little attempt to check or modify it. The claims that it was deliberately made "Generic" to reduce costs are surely a smokescreen to cover these inadequacies. They have not used this excuse on previous models with similar problems so I am surprised that they have come up with it for this series. I don't think the lettering "Load nor to exaed 14 Tons" has saved much money, nor the omission of the Tare "weight"

 

Regards all adrianbs

[peter220950]

As an example, I'm pretty sure a set of Slater's S7 wheels are, within a percent or so, the same material cost as a set of their coarse scale ones, and their fine scale ones too.

 

Simon

 

So why are we all modelling to O standards with inaccurate wheel profiles clearances, and the wrong track gauge?  I'm sure if Dapol made their wagons 3% out of scale there would be even more froth.

 

Surely following your logic it's no difference in cost for us all to do it correctly and model in S7, unless we are all prepared to buy RTR track and forget that it is in itself inaccurate. The only people that have not accepted some compromise are those running S7, with prototypical curves and no compression of layouts, and even then they haven't got authentic steam.

 

Otherwise it's just a question of how much of a compromise we are prepared to accept in our model railway.  What was it? - 'He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone'

 

We now know that these, and other wagons are incorrect, but so are our model railways, we are just arguing about the degree, generally speaking the more time and/or money you throw at the problem the closer you get to some sort of accuracy, a kit may be more accurate but factor in the time taken to build and paint it and you probably double its cost.

 

As to it being, in general, as expensive for a manufacturer to make an accurate model as a generic / inaccurate one, there are two observations that might counter the argument, firstly you probably need to spend more time in getting it 100% right, as research = time=cost. If you go down the route of reproducing something that someone else has produced it's cheaper, - it just might be wrong.

 

Secondly you are reliant upon having an army of rivet counting rail enthusiasts to constantly check that compromises are not being made by your supply chain at every stage of production, which again takes time and costs money, and they might not be the best people to employ in a business that needs to make a profit.

 

Dapol have taken a decision, or say they have, to produce a 'generic' (mongrel?) to appeal to the mass market, time alone will tell if it's the right decision, but if it's the wrong one it points to poor management, - good management costs more money = higher cost base=more expensive toys.

 

If you want highly accurate RTR I suspect you are going to have to pay big bucks, a Loveless Deltic is a bit more pricey than a Heljan one, which in turn was more than a Skytrex one, it depends if you want a scale model to put in a case or something to thrash around the garden.

 

If, like most of us, you are prepared to accept that a component of your loco's is flawed by incorrect wheel profiles and spacing, you might feel that having part of your model railway flawed by an incorrect component of a wagon is acceptable in the general scheme of things, if not there are plenty of alternatives out there, scratch-building, using the comprehensive range of parts available nowadays, buy a kit (as long as that isn't also inaccurate) or nowadays commission your own models.

 

Simples .

[adrianbs]

Hi Peter220950 Who said Dapol had NOT made some of their wagons 3%, or very nearly, out of scale ??

 

It's quite difficult to assess freelance wagons like their 5 plank as they give no information about the prototype although if you use information from full size wagons with the same livery and running numbers, errors of almost 10% will be produced. Similar errors exist on the 7 and 8 plank wagons depending on the livery applied.

 

The scale/gauge compromise has progressively become more and more of a dilemma as the standards of kits and RTR have improved since the original standards were drawn up. This is even more pronounced in 4mm and has led to P4/S4; EEM; EM. bastardised P4 (Which I use) and S7, none of which existed when I were a lad. As soon as RTR points become available I believe there will be a steady shift to S7 but it will be at least one generation later before it becomes significant.

 

The real point is that the excuses for innaccuracies of the type seen on Dapol wagons are very thin on the ground and running out fast.

Hopefully they will not be used at all in the future and that will give the lie to their use at the moment. All models have errors but minimising rather than maximising them should be the aim. Nobody will jump the last fence in the race to perfection as the fence is infinitely high but retiring at the sight of the first or second fence shows a definite lack of effort.

 

Regards all adrianbs

Edited August 22, 2014 by adrianbs

[peter220950]

Hi Peter220950 Who said Dapol had NOT made some of their wagons 3%, or very nearly, out of scale ??

 

 

 I must have missed that one in all of the lists, probably too busy modelling to my standards, and enjoying it.

[HSB]

It's not a question of being 'superdetailed' I think many people would be happy with a fairly basic model which could be detailed to choice if the basic model was reasonably accurate. By making a generic bodge-up they have lost out on a lot of potential sales!

[adrianbs]

Hi all    I agree with the last post from HSB and what a golden opportunity that would have given me for add-on accessory packs, had I not been retired. Once models reach the level of innaccuracy of all but the SR brakevan the cost and complications of any significant upgrade would only be acceptable to the more determined masochistic modeller.

Even the brakevan would need a long evenings work and an additional  £15 of bits to bring it up to the accuracy of it's nearest kit competition and then it would need a partial repaint as well.  It's not so much a matter of superdetailing,  a lot of the detail on Dapol wagons is precisely rendered but simply incorrect, missing or superfluous and replacement parts are difficult to fit because the model is RTR and not always easy to dismantle.    As has been explained by an earlier contributor the terms precision and accuracy are not interchangeable.  It is perfectly possible to have a precision moulded perfectly straight line of uniformly spaced hemispherical rivet heads but if the spacing is incorrect and the rivets should be hexagonal nuts with a hint of thread showing the detail is not accurate no matter how precise. Attempting to alter problems like this is certainly beyond all but the top few modellers.  Ten or a dozen might be OK but 200, I don't think so.       

             Regards all  adrianbs

Edited August 23, 2014 by adrianbs

[gardenwall]

Tower models have pictures of the first 5 liveries for the milk tanks. This is the first time details of what the actual liveries will look like for 3 of them.   The St Ivel is to be produced later.

 

Note the United Dairies is the same shot we have already seen, complete with typos, whether they have been corrected on production versions remains to be seen.   The remainder have no markings on the chassis at all, one hopes this is an expedient to display the tank liveries and production versions will be marked (sans typos).   Unigate Creameries is much as the samples displayed some time ago, silver. Express Dairies and Milk Marketing Board are blue, CWS is brown(red).

 

Buffers will need changing for longer ones if curves allow, rivets and brake gear issues seem still to be there, but they do have screw couplings.

[Dreadnought05]

They've also (finally) updated their picasa photo page, so there's a couple more views for each livery.

[adrianbs]

Hi all  Not Blocked from this site, yet !!    Your starter for ten is  "Where is the vacuum brake cylinder"  ( and indeed all the rest of the brake rodding, which was  so well executed on the brakevan that it is almost 100% accurate.)  It is interesting the solebar lettering is absent on all the latest pictures, could we be cheeky and assume that it has all been blacked out, perhaps to eliminate the spelling mistakes, mispositioning and font style errors. Maybe they will be sold like that and modellers will be given the advantage of being able to fit their own choice of lettering to suit the railway they model.    Looking closely at the pictures it appears that only one solebar has the "Double vision" rivetting so there is presumably only one mould tool for the chassis. That's a shame,  had there been two mould tools, one of them might have had correct rivetting on both sides. 

 

      Just for fun, try enlarging the pictures to 400% and see the effect the digitisation has on the spring leaves, it may not work on all screens but the effect is really weird. I notice they have indeed spent superfluous money on a second tank cradle design with 6 blocks which looks rather better than the other version and suits the earlier GWR wagons. If only they had used 3' 1" wheels,  put the brakeshoes in the right place,  fitted '23 RCH standard oilboxes, fitted --------------

          Never mind,   indeed, most won't !    adrianbs