Wright writes.....

[Jol Wilkinson]

8 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

The problem is that you confuse need and want.

 

Throughout most of Europe the maximum speed limit on public roads is 130kph or less.  With a few exceptions then there is no need for  a car that goes faster.  So please explain Ferrari, Porsche, Lotus, Lamborghini a whole raft of standard production cars and a host of others.

Because nowadays "status" is implied by what you own? So the better/more expensive are the things you own, the more self satisfied you can feel.

 

The irony is then, that you might have a not very well modelled railway layout, but can feel superior about the collection of highly detailed, DCC sound and light equipped, expensive models on it (or perhaps still in their boxes).

[Atso]

10 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Well, that's what @McC was saying. But perhaps Accurascale doesn't pay its designers the six-figure salaries other firms do? (!)

Who is paying six-figure salaries to designers? I'd like to apply!

[Tony Wright]

I'm sure I'll have written this before, but I've been lucky to have been offered sound advice (and I hope, taken it) by those I've respected in the hobby, one of whom was David Jenkinson. 

 

Regarding 'invisible detail', he was once taken to task with regard to why he omitted 'so much detail' on the underneath of the floorpan on his peerless, scratch-built carriages - conduits; that sort of thing. His reply (if I may paraphrase?) was 'If the only way you can see such detail is if your coach is running along an embankment, derails, tumbles down and lies upside down in a ditch, then don't build a model railway so badly that this happens!'. 

 

On another occasion his advice when building a model of a loco or rolling stock was 'Obtain as many prototype pictures as you can (usually taken from scores of feet away) and scrutinise them carefully. Any detail you can see clearly, then incorporate it on the model. Anything you cannot see, even if you know it to be there, don't bother fitting, because it won't be seen on the model (unless it derails/crashes/etc.'). I think he was talking about things like vacuum cylinders between the frames of locos and so on. That said, Geoff Holt probably fitted inside motion on the multi-cylinder locos he built for him. I know when I photographed some of his great work in this respect, he had to lift the boiler off for me take a picture (or even see it!). 

 

Regarding mainstream RTR, will we eventually see similar things incorporated into our models? It's already present on some top-end stuff..........

 

More later. 

 

 

[CF MRC]

The art of model making is what you leave out, not what you put in. 
 

The trick is to make the brain think it is seeing more detail than is actually there. 
 

Tim

Edited June 8, 2023 by CF MRC

[Andy Hayter]

9 hours ago, lezz01 said:

Autobahns.

Regards Lez.

 

I was very careful in my use of words and wrote "most of Europe".  So yes Germany does have Autobahns but probably not widely known in the UK, much of the network does have a speed restriction (120kph or less - and heavily controlled).

 

When I left Germany 10 years ago and after 17 years working there, 70% of the motorway network had a speed restriction* and while I am no longer up to date, I sense that that percentage is increasing still.

 

* Source: ADAC - the German equivalent to the AA.

[cctransuk]

10 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

... please explain Ferrari, Porsche, Lotus, Lamborghini a whole raft of standard production cars and a host of others.

 

Testosterone, combined with more money than they can ever spend!

 

CJI.

[cctransuk]

12 hours ago, Northmoor said:

What people WANT and what they NEED are often very different things, but any number of products (cars, domestic appliances, clothes, accessories) have demonstrated that they will pay considerably more for the former than what they will for the latter.  Even if they don't actually get the benefit of the more expensive, better product, they only have to "believe" they have benefitted.

 

I also rarely buy new RTR but in my experience, those that complain loudest about the price of RTR are never satisfied with the the price of the cheaper, lesser detailed product either.

 

That doesn't help the considerable sector of the market - which I believe to be larger than it is commonly depicted - that is more discerning in what it purchases.

 

If all the available products have all the latest bells and whistles, you pay up or do without!

 

CJI.

[cctransuk]

12 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

I generally buy models on a voluntary basis, based on my desires and budgetary means.

 

So do I - or not - but if I want a model for the detail that I can see, I also have to pay for the detail that I cannot see - or want!

 

Hence my virtual abandonment of RTR purchases.

 

CJI.

[Tony Wright]

Regarding 'detail' on high-end RTR models, how about this?

 

 

A candid view of the nether regions of an RTR Golden Age OO Gauge A4. Full inside motion is modelled, and even the 2-1 lever ahead of the cylinders moves. Note also, all the correct forked joints, even on the lubricator drive.

 

 

On to the front end. Apart from on-shed, none of this is strictly necessary (and certainly not for running on LB). 

 

All of this has a cost, of course (when I bought this it was over £1,000.00, and that was a few years ago!). I still ask myself why I bought it. Not because it's not an exceptional model, but rather because it is. None of the A4s I've made has anything like this level of detail, for several reasons; it can't be seen, I'm too lazy and certainly not skilled enough to incorporate it and even if I could, why bother? It's never used (or very rarely), and spends most of its life in a drawer. To reach this level of detail (even assuming I could) would take me so much more time than I ever spend on building any loco, and to what purpose? To show off? Hardly likely. 

 

For an 'ordinary' RTR manufacturer to produce something like the above would raise the cost bar considerably, and render anything else they've done before obsolete. Yes, we've had opening smokebox doors before (years and years ago, on a Tri-ang M7, for instance) but not to anything of this complexity.

 

Finally, regarding internal detail on RTR models, it seems to me to be somewhat ironic that I had to 'break into' that SECR six-wheeled brake in order to see it, and then, because it wouldn't stay put by friction alone, glue the roof back on!  

 

 

[gr.king]

If you go to the trouble of building your own models from scratch, you'll soon be able to decide whether the inclusion of extensive hidden details is a significant extra "cost" burden on time, effort and enthusiasm.

 

I was happy to try to include comprehensive hidden detail on a few occasions simply to prove to myself that I could do it. I now feel that there are much more useful things I can do with my time.

[Bernard Lamb]

20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Regarding 'detail' on high-end RTR models, how about this?

 

 

A candid view of the nether regions of an RTR Golden Age OO Gauge A4. Full inside motion is modelled, and even the 2-1 lever ahead of the cylinders moves. Note also, all the correct forked joints, even on the lubricator drive.

 

 

On to the front end. Apart from on-shed, none of this is strictly necessary (and certainly not for running on LB). 

 

All of this has a cost, of course (when I bought this it was over £1,000.00, and that was a few years ago!). I still ask myself why I bought it. Not because it's not an exceptional model, but rather because it is. None of the A4s I've made has anything like this level of detail, for several reasons; it can't be seen, I'm too lazy and certainly not skilled enough to incorporate it and even if I could, why bother? It's never used (or very rarely), and spends most of its life in a drawer. To reach this level of detail (even assuming I could) would take me so much more time than I ever spend on building any loco, and to what purpose? To show off? Hardly likely. 

 

For an 'ordinary' RTR manufacturer to produce something like the above would raise the cost bar considerably, and render anything else they've done before obsolete. Yes, we've had opening smokebox doors before (years and years ago, on a Tri-ang M7, for instance) but not to anything of this complexity.

 

Finally, regarding internal detail on RTR models, it seems to me to be somewhat ironic that I had to 'break into' that SECR six-wheeled brake in order to see it, and then, because it wouldn't stay put by friction alone, glue the roof back on!  

 

 

Did Merlin ever run with that type of front screw coupling?

Bernard

[polybear]

56 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Testosterone, combined with more money than they can ever spend!

 

CJI.

 

They can always spend some of it on the speeding fine:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12160909/Motorist-gets-104-000-speeding-ticket-One-Finlands-richest-men-gets-huge-fine.html

 

He obviously hasn't learned his lesson - this is the 3rd big fine he's had (though this is by far the biggest).

[Jesse Sim]

18 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Just in for review....

 

 

Rapido's OO Gauge ex-SECR six-wheeled brake van.

 

It looks to be an extraordinarily good model. 

 

 

I keep seeing these pop up and I keep wondering if there is a possibility to alter one into a Pre-grouping Eastern type. I know the GN is out as the planking direction is wrong, but I haven’t checked any other company yet…. I must investigate. 

[Barclay]

I built an LMS brake van from the Parkside kit about 25 years ago, and, because I had recently photographed the interior of one at the NRM I added an interior. I have never seen it since, can't see it however hard I try, and can't supply a photo. I haven't repeated this extravagance!

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Did Merlin ever run with that type of front screw coupling?

Bernard

Good afternoon Bernard,

 

It's got twisted up in my photographing the loco.

 

 

It normally hangs in the correct manner.

 

 

But it can get twisted a bit. The links are rather stiff, and it never gets used.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

[Steamport Southport]

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

So do I - or not - but if I want a model for the detail that I can see, I also have to pay for the detail that I cannot see - or want!

 

Hence my virtual abandonment of RTR purchases.

 

CJI.

 

The Rapido SECR brake van costs £34 at most retailers.

 

How much for a kit and all the extras? Just for a basic brake van kit.

 

The only SECR brake van kit of any type currently available is the Cambrian one.

 

https://www.cambrianmodelrail.co.uk/store/C78-SECR-Dancehall-Brake-Van-D1560-p94432836

 

£19.20 plus the extras such as wheels, couplings, paint, transfers, etc. Okay some modellers will have most of the extras in stock, but a newcomer probably wouldn't.

 

The Bachmann version of the Dancehall is about £40 if you look around.

 

That £34 isn't looking so expensive if you want a SECR brake van. 

 

 

Jason

[CF MRC]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

On to the front end. Apart from on-shed, none of this is strictly necessary (and certainly not for running on LB). 

 

 

 

 

Steaming would be a bit compromised with the blocked tubes…

 

Tim

[lezz01]

2 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

I was very careful in my use of words and wrote "most of Europe".  So yes Germany does have Autobahns but probably not widely known in the UK, much of the network does have a speed restriction (120kph or less - and heavily controlled).

 

When I left Germany 10 years ago and after 17 years working there, 70% of the motorway network had a speed restriction* and while I am no longer up to date, I sense that that percentage is increasing still.

 

* Source: ADAC - the German equivalent to the AA.

Ok if you don't accept the Autobahn as a valid reason for stupidly fast cars I raise you the nordschleife circuit at the Nürburgring. You pay per lap. Look up something called YouTube corner for the greatest videos of idiots crashing their own cars on a circuit so dangerous that it was dropped from F1 for being too dangerous. It's worth looking up as there is endless hours of entertainment just waiting for you and before you ask yes I have (been round it) and no I didn't (crash) although I did have a bit of a code brown my first go at YouTube corner as it's quite deceptive and the accident starts at the exit of the previous corner. Even though I had put in about a hundred hours on a simulator it still nearly caught me out, as I said it's quite deceptive.

Regards Lez. 

[Bernard Lamb]

18 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Bernard,

 

It's got twisted up in my photographing the loco.

 

 

It normally hangs in the correct manner.

 

 

But it can get twisted a bit. The links are rather stiff, and it never gets used.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Good afternoon Tony.

Not the position but the type.

The top link on the model is made up of two straight plates, but in the normal type the top link is an inverted U.

I am more used to seeing the two plate version on German locomotives.

A quick look through a few books and I cannot find a photograph of an A4 with that type.

Bernard

[Denbridge]

3 hours ago, CF MRC said:

Steaming would be a bit compromised with the blocked tubes…

 

Tim

And no smokebox! Also no blastpipe, blower etc.

[Tony Teague]

3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

The Rapido SECR brake van costs £34 at most retailers.

 

How much for a kit and all the extras? Just for a basic brake van kit.

 

The only SECR brake van kit of any type currently available is the Cambrian one.

 

https://www.cambrianmodelrail.co.uk/store/C78-SECR-Dancehall-Brake-Van-D1560-p94432836

 

£19.20 plus the extras such as wheels, couplings, paint, transfers, etc. Okay some modellers will have most of the extras in stock, but a newcomer probably wouldn't.

 

The Bachmann version of the Dancehall is about £40 if you look around.

 

That £34 isn't looking so expensive if you want a SECR brake van. 

 

 

Jason

 

As a Southern modeller I wanted one of these 6 wheel brakes and about 6 years ago found a 3D printed version on Shapeways.

It cost £41 then, and still needed wheels, couplings, paint, transfers, etc.

Even in the best quality material that they offered at the time, it made up into a pretty awful model, but I was happy to have such an unusual prototype in my collection and did not expect that something RTR would ever appear.

(it's the one on the left!).

 

 

Of course, it has no internal detail, but will probably now be consigned to a drawer somewhere!

 

Tony

Edited June 8, 2023 by Tony Teague

[gr.king]

A further note: Having read the earlier assertions that the added cost due to incorporation of un-seen detail in an RTR model is now "negligible" or "insignificant", isn't that very much a matter of opinion? Irrespective of my willingness or otherwise to put un-necessary extra time and cost into models that I make for myself, as a potential customer for commercial products, any un-necessary extra cost is to me definitely significant, and cannot be described as negligible. It may be handy for a manufacturer who can make extra profit from an "enhanced" product to claim that the additional attributable cost is "negligible" or well worthwhile, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is so...

 

I object equally to the fact that even those of us with absolutely no need of, and no intention of using DCC and sound, now have to pay the significant extra cost of locos being manufactured with additional wiring, circuit boards and strange internal configurations purely to facilitate the fitting of digital gizmos, often with the added detriment of compromised visible features and both motor and weight in non-ideal positions.

[cctransuk]

30 minutes ago, gr.king said:

A further note: Having read the earlier assertions that the added cost due to incorporation of un-seen detail in an RTR model is now "negligible" or "insignificant", isn't that very much a matter of opinion? Irrespective of my willingness or otherwise to put un-necessary extra time and cost into models that I make for myself, as a potential customer for commercial products, any un-necessary extra cost is to me definitely significant, and cannot be described as negligible. It may be handy for a manufacturer who can make extra profit from an "enhanced" product to claim that the additional attributable cost is "negligible" or well worthwhile, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is so...

 

I object equally to the fact that even those of us with absolutely no need of, and no intention of using DCC and sound, now have to pay the significant extra cost of locos being manufactured with additional wiring, circuit boards and strange internal configurations purely to facilitate the fitting of digital gizmos, often with the added detriment of compromised visible features and both motor and weight in non-ideal positions.

 

Absolutely spot-on !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What we are now seeing / suffering the consequences of, is exactly the same as that which is endemic in the IT industry.

 

Think of an 'innovation'; convince the customer that they must have it; sell it; then make it 'old hat'.

 

.....and the market is daft enough to swallow it and cough up!

 

Why are so many of us so gullible? Answer that, and you know the meaning of life and everything!

 

I despair !!!

 

CJI.

 

[Compound2632]

They're just pining for the days when they were scraping the molded handrails off their Triang B12.

[Tony Wright]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

They're just pining for the days when they were scraping the molded handrails off their Triang B12.

And bleeding all over it. I know!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.