Guest Phil Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Im not sure who is to decide what is useful to any topic.... The one thing I do know is that many (not all) of the posts that consist of several paragraphs can normally be edited to put across the same point in a couple of lines; though maybe the book writers have their reasons From what I understand this is a forum where people chat and debate stuff, probably similar to chatting socially in a pub, bar, restaurant, doctors waiting room etc. Some people are more verbally eloquent than others, and use more words in the process. Perhaps some writers are the same ? I know I am, and coincidentally I am writing a book - so perhaps you are referring to me Mickey ? But why would I want to cut my posts down to "bullet points" ? That takes the fun out of the forum, and turns it into chavspeak textlingo. You have your opinion, I have mine, but it rather looks as though this thread is dying on it's feet. I will repeat an earlier entry though, and hope Simon Kohler finds the good bits of this thread useful and can seperate the wheat from the chaff without dying of terminal boredom in the process. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2013 From what I understand this is a forum where people chat and debate stuff, probably similar to chatting socially in a pub, bar, restaurant, doctors waiting room etc. Some people are more verbally eloquent than others, and use more words in the process. Perhaps some writers are the same ? I know I am, and coincidentally I am writing a book - so perhaps you are referring to me Mickey ? But why would I want to cut my posts down to "bullet points" ? That takes the fun out of the forum, and turns it into chavspeak textlingo. You have your opinion, I have mine, but it rather looks as though this thread is dying on it's feet. I will repeat an earlier entry though, and hope Simon Kohler finds the good bits of this thread useful and can seperate the wheat from the chaff without dying of terminal boredom in the process. Or having a darn good laugh at "our" expense. One of the prime differences between a forum and a good website like that of Graham Muz (himself an acccomplished modeller and valued member of RMweb, of course) is the knockabout nature of postings here, which in a majority of threads retain dignity and honour on all sides, but occasionally, as here, issues are seized upon and temperatures rise. Then management feels the need to knock a few heads together - as in the rest of life. Much of this thread is empty air - not because the contributors are insincere, but because we don't yet know all sorts of things about which we are offering opinions. The clod-hurling about means of current collection is a bit of a side-show, relating as it does to the UK market in general, rather than Hornby alone, but if there were to be a change in design to accommodate oldlugger's aims, it probably wouldn't happen in a recession. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Phil Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 You got that completely wrong way about their Phil, but never mind. The "books" I was referring to are those posts that fill out to several paragraphs where one would do, nowhere did I mnetion bullet points or txt spk. Its not the posts that are long that is bad its that it seems some people think making a post long for the sake of it gives it more weight. The art of good writing is to be concise; its not a payment-per-word activity. Ahhhh - now you see - if you weren't so concise, you'd have explained yourself - lol !!!!! I understand now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 There are a number of posts on this topic that have made no useful contribution to this topic and I am surprised that they have not been deleted. Examples include posts 1978,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2002,2004 and 2005. I am also surprised by the number of sarcastic and "wiser than thou" comments which are absent in other web sites like grahammuz.com that gives an air of professionalism that seems to be lacking in some of the posts on this site. I am sorry that this statement does not make a useful contribution either but I would like to put on some information when the Hornby Southern 2-BIL comes out in the next week or so. Feel free to do so, Robin (my bold). As for the earlier thrust of your comments, Graham's excellent site is his blog, as many others on here have (or are developing). These are private sites where the views are those primarily of the blogger, who pretty much defines the tone, direction and content. This site however, is a public forum, moderated in line with 'house rules' by a generally very fair, tolerant and broadminded group of moderators. It canvasses and reflects a broad spectrum of views and abilities, from obsessives and the opinionated, to the more casual and lighthearted, free-spirited, and dreamers. We can each pick and choose which sites we visit, and those threads to which we contribute. We can also find time and space, I hope for a little levity. I don't link my blog on RMWeb for fear of upsetting folk. But I don't think we should fear gentle humour and chiding on here... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Robin Brasher, on 31 Jan 2013 - 08:40, said: There are a number of posts on this topic that have made no useful contribution to this topic and I am surprised that they have not been deleted. Was I the only one to go back through Newbymoderator Brasher's list of waste of space entries to see if any were mine? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Was I the only one to go back through Newbymoderator Brasher's list of waste of space entries to see if any were mine? Stationmaster Frobisher 'CHARD Belgian Obi Jeff Kenobi Olddudders 81C Ian J ...and I feel I'm in some fairly esteemed company there, but don't feel left out Coach! EDIT: yes, I checked, just to feed my OCD... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2013 I think this thread may now be well and truly beyond hope Edit: to add missed word 'think' It would have been easier just to delete the 'I' instead......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod5 Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 So where were we? Ah yes back on topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 What a wonderful thread. I have had a few thoughts on the many themes that have been discussed. Design Clever - what went before? Design Stupid? Close coupling between loco & tender. This has been dismissed as too expensive to develop, but both the Red Corner and the Blue Corner have the technology "in house"! Or do we in the UK not talk to family members in Europe? NEM close coupling between rolling stock, again all the technology (and the parts) are available and used by parts of both the red and blue companies. All it will take to get rid of the ugly gap - and the B.... Awful hook and bar couplings is either Hornby or Bachmann to break ranks and use what they already have to improve UK models by a huge amount. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaneofFife Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 If I was Robin I would be feeling pretty much like a real unwelcome outsider right now - some of guys are having a proper pack mentality dig at the guy. You (you know who you are) might not agree with some of his comments but then he might not agree with some of yours but I dont see the vitriol flowing back the other way. Give the guy a break..............reminds me of the sort of bullies we had at our school. Loud when in a crowd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 ...Close coupling between loco & tender. This has been dismissed as too expensive to develop, but both the Red Corner and the Blue Corner have the technology "in house"! ... I would question the worth of a close coupling mechanism for this in a UK context. The largest UK tender locos available RTR are pacifics, and these still have reasonably short tenders. The end result is that a simple rigid drawbar with the loco and tender at scale separation enables operation down to a 30" radius. Opening the gap very slightly allows smaller radii. Since locos this size look very silly on set track curves, surely that is good enough? Smaller locos, including the majority with a rear driver near the rear of the loco are even easier to accomodate; a scale loco to tender gap can often be achieved on 3rd radius. Points against a close coupling mechanism; potential sloppiness, added cost however small. It just looks poor when the loco moves and the tender doesn't move as a piece with it. Don't spend a penny on it is better in my view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod5 Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I thought we were supposed to be back On Topic, you know, Hornby Trains? It would appear not Mickey from the post above yours. So a little less subtle this time if we can move on from the arguments on either side please and return to the topic to save it being locked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Back on topic as requested: with the first of the 2BIL models now available from Hornby, it does seem as though they are delivering on their promise to sort out the supply chain problems, which bodes well for the rest of this year's programme. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 31, 2013 Re staying on topic, I did set up an alternative thread to discuss market sectors for different levels of detail and have also posited a thread with a poll to get a view on what we here want from RTR in OO (which is on hold pending support of Andy Y and the mods) in order not to overload this one. However, this thread just seems to have continued on ad nauseam. I will now retire from it gracefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenser Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 What a wonderful thread. I have had a few thoughts on the many themes that have been discussed. Design Clever - what went before? Design Stupid? Close coupling between loco & tender. This has been dismissed as too expensive to develop, but both the Red Corner and the Blue Corner have the technology "in house"! Or do we in the UK not talk to family members in Europe? NEM close coupling between rolling stock, again all the technology (and the parts) are available and used by parts of both the red and blue companies. All it will take to get rid of the ugly gap - and the B.... Awful hook and bar couplings is either Hornby or Bachmann to break ranks and use what they already have to improve UK models by a huge amount. Mike New models are invariably fitted with NEM pockets now, and while Bachmann's Mk1s have them at the wrong height, as far as I'm aware current releases from the manufacturers have the height set according to standards. Since Hornby supply their own slightly longer version of the Roco close coupler with NEM plug as a spare part item, and I think in some cases these may be supplied as extras with models , it's easy enough to substitute at a very small cost . For a little more money you can plug in Kadees . I admit that there is a problem with Bachmann units which use a conductive bar coupling between vehicles so that the whole unit can be controlled by a single decoder. On the 108 you can substitute Kadees between the vehicles , on a 150, and the more recent units you can't if you want lights in the trailer to work The NEM plastic steam pipes supplied with Bachmann's Mk1 and Mk2 coaches are surprisingly effective in closing the gap if you can live with operating a fixed rake The general adoption of the NEM pocket means that couplings aren't the big issue they once were. If you feel strongly about tension locks the remedy is in your hands The modern slim line tension lock is in any case a lot less intrusive and objectionable , and I think some of the vehement feeling against them is from memories of the "Volvo bumper bar" era , though I accept there are still a few old models in production with fixed bumper bars Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2013 I would question the worth of a close coupling mechanism for this in a UK context. The largest UK tender locos available RTR are pacifics, and these still have reasonably short tenders. The end result is that a simple rigid drawbar with the loco and tender at scale separation enables operation down to a 30" radius. Opening the gap very slightly allows smaller radii. Since locos this size look very silly on set track curves, surely that is good enough? Smaller locos, including the majority with a rear driver near the rear of the loco are even easier to accomodate; a scale loco to tender gap can often be achieved on 3rd radius. Points against a close coupling mechanism; potential sloppiness, added cost however small. It just looks poor when the loco moves and the tender doesn't move as a piece with it. Don't spend a penny on it is better in my view. Such a mechanism doesn't have to incorporate a spring which is what leads to the problem described. Most coaches can now be close coupled using a cam arrangement albeit with NEM pockets on the ends. No pockets would be needed between a loco and tender, allowing the mechanism to be much more compact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Regarding close coupling between loco and tender, the simple two alternative holes looked to be the answer even with locos that have wires between the two components to carry DCC or tender pick ups. If only Hornby and Bachmann shared the same ingredients, we would also have Bachmann locos with tender pick-ups and Hornby's fine lining out, while Hornby locos would have Bachmann's shade of BR green! I apologise if this is not strictly in the spirit of 'on-topic'. I for one look forward to viewing members uploaded images of the new 2BIL EMU... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porcy Mane Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I got my first sight of the new catalogue yesterday and noticed something that I hope is encouraging. The prototype pictures against the entries for the forthcoming Fish van were all of the later BR version, not the one that is readily available as a Parkside Dundas kit and has been previously been produced in r-t-r form by HD / Wrenn / Dapol. If it's right, Hornby will be getting an extra hundred smackers out of me. PLEASE don't let it be a mistake......... JDS Regrettably past experience suggests that Hornby catalogue pictures of models yet to come tend to be on the optimistic or misleading side of accurately informative. Those who produce the catalogue find a pic of what they think is the right thing meanwhile the designers are busily getting underway what they 'know' is the right thing (even if it sin't entirely right). The simple maxim is 'wait and see' - unless folk think there is enough time and weight of emails and correspondence to steer Hornby designers in the required detail direction. Sadly I think the Stationmaster is spot on. I'm sure the point will have been made somewhere in the past 2000 or so posts bit I think we'll be getting a Diagram 1\800 "Parkside" type fish van. The Prototype (Model I'm talking about) photo that Andy put up in post 795 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65398-hornbys-2013-announcements/page-32&do=findComment&comment=884499 looks like it's a 3D print. I tend to think that indicates Hornby is too far down the production road to change. Probably wishful thinking on my part but with the speed 3D artwork and Rapid prototyping can be altered and roughly gauging opinions expressed, I'd like to think Hornby could change tack to produce a later Diagram 1/801. Not that it would make a jot of difference to Hornby’s bank account... but if the van was produced to the standard of their later Ballast and BR brake vans I’d take twenty straight away. If it’s the earlier Dia. 800 van were getting, then Hornby… change the buffers! They look like Oleos on your pre prod. model. You need self contained!!! Porcy Edited to insert missing words and crappy grammar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 Regarding close coupling between loco and tender, the simple two alternative holes looked to be the answer ... Simple and effective if done right (the Thompson O1, bang on, good job Hornby) but so often the closer hole is still far from correct for scale separation. Bachmann's 9F is a particularly wayward specimen. It is possible to drill another hole in the drawbar supplied inboard of the closest hole supplied, to enable correct separation! (The neat adjustable slide that Bachmann now use for the tender peg is probably the best arrangement as it enables the user to adjust for the layout minimum radius.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Bedding Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 I don't think you are alone in this. The Churchward 4-6-0's and particularly the 'Star' looked neat and balanced whereas something was lost when Collett put the boilers on steriods and produced the 'Castle' and 'King'. I agree with the comparison, though there is only one model GWR 4-6-0 that I would find a temptation, and that would be one of the early "Saints". I would cheerfully settle for "design clever" (whatever that really means) if that should put its price within my reach. It would need some compatible coaches though, and I am not sure where the market is on that score. PB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 2126 posts, 86 pages and only a couple of early posts mention what Hornby consider their most important release this year (judging by what they say in this weeks stock market press release). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2013 Sadly I think the Stationmaster is spot on. I'm sure the point will have been made somewhere in the past 2000 or so posts bit I think we'll be getting a Diagram 1\800 "Parkside" type fish van. The Prototype (Model I'm talking about) photo that Andy put up in post 795 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65398-hornbys-2013-announcements/page-32&do=findComment&comment=884499 looks like it's a 3D print. I tend to think that indicates Hornby is too far down the production road to change. Probably wishful thinking on my part but with the speed 3D artwork and Rapid prototyping can be altered and roughly gauging opinions expressed, I'd like to think Hornby could change tack produce a later Diagram 1/801. Not that it would make a jot of difference to Hornby’s bank account but if the van was produced to the standard of their later Ballast and BR brake vans I’d take twenty straight away. If it’s the earlier Dia. 800 van were getting, then Hornby… change the buffers! They look like Oleos on your pre prod. model. You need self contained!!! Porcy A wasted opportunity. The uncommitted would not have cared which sort Hornby produced but many of us who already have models of the duplicated design simply won't be interested. I would buy several Diagram 801 vans to add variety but, if I want more Diagram 800s, I'll build some more Parkside kits so they match the ones I already have. Incidentally, the catalogue photo of the prototype CCT is the one with side windows, not the one portrayed in Hornby's test shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted January 31, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 31, 2013 I for one look forward to viewing members uploaded images of the new 2BIL EMU... Me too, but in the existing 2-BIL topic in the Hornby thread rather than here, please... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 2126 posts, 86 pages and only a couple of early posts mention what Hornby consider their most important release this year (judging by what they say in this weeks stock market press release). That's not how I read their statement, which is: "At the London Toy Fair last week, we showcased our major product introductions for 2013. Our new category initiatives for 2013 include ..." So the things they list are "new category initiatives" rather than "most important release this year" (although they then bang on about range extension (ie, not "new category initiatives") in the Corgi brand, so who knows what they mean?). Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 So the things they list are "new category initiatives" rather than "most important release this year" ..... That is true Paul, but they see fit to highlight the products, or product areas which are presumably key elements of 2013's sales effort. They are hardly likely to mention relatively small individual product runs (i.e. various model trains) from within one of their product lines. The model railway items mentioned have a significance right across their Hornby Railway and Hornby International businesses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.