Simon Says

[Ozexpatriate]

Well - not quite - I use my real name.

 

I've never quite understood this pseudonym thing - if you hold firm opinions, or even just wish to make comments, why would you not wish to be directly associated with them?

Duly noted John. I have changed my post accordingly to fix the inaccuracy.

 

At this point I choose not to use my real name for professional reasons. It's possible that colleagues or even clients of mine or my company use RMweb.

 

But I understand your point.

[JSpencer]

Of the 3 examples:

 

One panel training printed the wrong way around on a Gresley coach will not turn a very fine model into a bad one. In fact I would surprised if the real things ALL had that panel round the right way. We are looking at an era which is quite rustic compared to today after all. So Simon valid on this one as if is a minor niggle.

 

The Star is a fine model, but no one understands why design clever got in the way of the cab handrails. The number of wheel spokes is a stupid error easily fixed and has been by Hornby. The former was a pointless design decision that they should not have done, the latter is "everyone makes mistakes" and they did put it right.

 

The VEP!

This came after Bachmann,s CEP which set a bench mark for EMUs. Even if the have added the interior door windows and put the bogies on the right way around, there is still an awful lot wrong with it. For example the roof bumps are all half size, so are the horns, and the interconnecting doors by the cabs are recessed far too far back. The step boards are the same between late and early versions but is only correct for late....

Once Bachmann CEP set the bench mark, the VEP had an act to follow. If it had came out like the in say 2004, people would have jumped for joy at having finally an EMU....

Worse it cost more than the CEP.

I have still got all three of them, 2 brought at bargain prices.

[surfsup]

Of the 3 examples:

 

One panel training printed the wrong way around on a Gresley coach will not turn a very fine model into a bad one. In fact I would surprised if the real things ALL had that panel round the right way. We are looking at an era which is quite rustic compared to today after all. So Simon valid on this one as if is a minor niggle.

 

The Star is a fine model, but no one understands why design clever got in the way of the cab handrails. The number of wheel spokes is a stupid error easily fixed and has been by Hornby. The former was a pointless design decision that they should not have done, the latter is "everyone makes mistakes" and they did put it right.

 

The VEP!

This came after Bachmann,s CEP which set a bench mark for EMUs. Even if the have added the interior door windows and put the bogies on the right way around, there is still an awful lot wrong with it. For example the roof bumps are all half size, so are the horns, and the interconnecting doors by the cabs are recessed far too far back. The step boards are the same between late and early versions but is only correct for late....

Once Bachmann CEP set the bench mark, the VEP had an act to follow. If it had came out like the in say 2004, people would have jumped for joy at having finally an EMU....

Worse it cost more than the CEP.

I have still got all three of them, 2 brought at bargain prices.

Indeed! I'm also a little well, bemused / underwhelmed? (Cant think of the right wording at the moment!) as to the statement that nothing was picked up from the prototype exhibited at the Roadshows - Surely a lot of us including me would have said something, I certainly remember that that front end corridor issue was picked up on here at the time of it being a prototype. While the bench setting CEP was a hard act to follow, what came out of Hornby wasn't indeed their finest hour - We might have had to wait a while for Bachmann's EMUs, but you end up with a product which at least you get the feeling that Bachmann has put a lot of effort into making sure it looks correct. And testing some of them too, which was another issue where the VEP fell down on with the bogies fitted the wrong way around (not to mention the odd issue of the motor appearing slap bang in the middle of the passenger saloon end of the motor car as apposed to hiding it in the guards compartment). What also annoys me is that I was once told that 3417 had been laser scanned for a company presumably Hornby. So if they have had access to the unit, what was it that made it go so horribly wrong? That's were the element of blame has to lie with Hornby, and not lumping part of it on out side in this case. It was a model not up to the level it should have been, and in some respects despite some of the modifications, still remains that way unfortunately.

[Les1952]

I am not at all convinced that people WOULD mention problems seen on models on display at road shows.

 

Two reasons 

 

 It is human nature (especially amongst the British) not to complain but to enjoy going away and bellyaching to anyone who will listen.

 

Dapol had three livery examples of the A3 on display at several shows prior to its release, all of which had the upper tender lining in the wrong place.  NOBODY commented on the error, meaning that when the production runs were the same they needed to be sent back to be corrected.  I include myself, as I saw the models and failed to spot the position was wrong, concentrating on other aspects.

 

As a thought, wasn't the overscale Ixion Manor shown off at a few shows without anyone suggesting it needed a ruler running over it?  I may be wrong on the latter.

 

All the best

Les

[jwealleans]

I would surprised if the real things ALL had that panel round the right way. We are looking at an era which is quite rustic

I suspect that most, if not all, of the coachbuilders at Doncaster or anywhere else on the LNER would take great offence at that remark. Since carriages were largely handbuilt and finished there was, I would suggest, a great deal less likelihood of something of that nature (a) arising and ( b ) getting past the foreman in either the Repair or Finishing shops.

[The Stationmaster]

I suspect that most, if not all, of the coachbuilders at Doncaster or anywhere else on the LNER would take great offence at that remark. Since carriages were largely handbuilt and finished there was, I would suggest, a great deal less likelihood of something of that nature (a) arising and ( b ) getting past the foreman in either the Repair or Finishing shops.

They certainly would at York - where a great uncle of mine was a Coach Bodybuilder and where his son and one of his grandsons followed him into railway employment.  The son - a cousin of my father's - explained to me many years ago how spray painting of the graining effect on steel sheathed coach bodies was introduced, initially to some resistance from the painters but they subsequently proceeded to acquire considerable pride in their skill to get imitation graining using a spray gun.  I have no doubt that if somebody told them their graining was running the wrong way there would have been considerable ructions.

[JSpencer]

I suspect that most, if not all, of the coachbuilders at Doncaster or anywhere else on the LNER would take great offence at that remark. Since carriages were largely handbuilt and finished there was, I would suggest, a great deal less likelihood of something of that nature (a) arising and ( b ) getting past the foreman in either the Repair or Finishing shops.

I do not doubt that they took considerable pride in their work and I do not doubt that they were considerably skilled. However in practice, real life gets in the way of things, like a sudden rush to get new stock on the line before certain dates and later war work. Under those conditions, if it is not essential to the running, comfort and safety of the vehicle, it gets overlooked.

No one and no system is perfect.

[Les1952]

However, the blog refers to a preserved coach being used as the prototype for the incorrect panelling, not one turned out by York.

 

Doncaster, however, wasn't as exact with locomotives-

The parabolic curve on the side of A4s varied from loco to loco- plenty of photos of pairs of A4s side by side show this.

Published head-on shots also show that parabola different on the two sides of the same loco......

High-sided 8-wheel tenders occasionally were turned out with the upper lining about a foot too low- again look at the "Book of" series for examples.  It is thought that not all of these were wrong on both sides of the same tender....

 

There are also published photos of locos released to traffic from Darlington and Swindon with incorrect front number plates. I forget the Swindon one but the Darlington one was 61400 carrying 61409's plate (or the other way round).

 

All the very best

Les

[Dunsignalling]

I do not doubt that they took considerable pride in their work and I do not doubt that they were considerably skilled. However in practice, real life gets in the way of things, like a sudden rush to get new stock on the line before certain dates and later war work. Under those conditions, if it is not essential to the running, comfort and safety of the vehicle, it gets overlooked.

No one and no system is perfect.

But the sort of error that is much more likely to occur if one has modern day digital assistance.

 

To err is human, but for a really big cock-up you need a computer.

 

John

[Les1952]

I don't know, Cowlairs didn't need a computer to fit two left cylinders to the same K2- the remarkable thing was it still ran with the valves on one side in backwards.....

 

Les

[JSpencer]

But the sort of error that is much more likely to occur if one has modern day digital assistance.

 

To err is human, but for a really big cock-up you need a computer.

 

John

Indeed when automation messes up, it does so in an automated way. Hence my statement no system is perfect either.

 

Modern day CNC machine tools are quite capable of churning out steam engines with far greater consistent accuracy than people 80 years ago could only dream of. This does not mean humans are incapable of producing a more accurate locomotive, we are just far more variable which means - thanks to the laws of averages - a few engines may indeed be far better machined, but the bulk of them will not be. Both modern CNC and Human systems need QC however only the former can work to finer tolerances.

 

Personally - getting back on subject and as an example - I suspect Hornby,s designers are passionate capable people too, but in a race to - say - beat Bachmann to releasing their air cons in variably lead to some silly errors getting through. Tight budgets and time constraints are all very real for a company full of salaried individuals. If employees were paid only once the items were released and paid for, most employees would simply be unable to live.

 

I suspect equally the people working to preserve Gresley coached are also deeply talented and proud of their work but they still clearly get it wrong sometimes. And we have to accept that mistakes sometimes happens ( certainly no criticism from me to people preserving our heritage).

[Mad McCann]

I don't know, Cowlairs didn't need a computer to fit two left cylinders to the same K2- the remarkable thing was it still ran with the valves on one side in backwards.....

 

Les

First that I've heard of that one, Les. Do you have a literary source for that tale? I'm assuming the fact wasn't discovered until A; the next shopping or B; Somebody realised they had a spare right hander on the shop floor.

Still, it's Cowlairs. You wouldn't catch the Caley boys over the hill dropping one like that! ;-)

 

Dave.

[jjb1970]

Machinery can be remarkably resilient, a few times in my career I've seen machinery which has been opened up for maintenance or replacement and only then do people find some horrific problem that all of the text books and equipment manuals tell you would destroy the thing or cause a massive drop in performance. Then other times some seemingly trivial thing causes stuff to fall to bits, funny old world.

[Les1952]

I'm trying to remember which book the K2 story is related in. I don't think it was the Green Guide but if it was it would be under K2.

 

The loco was returned to one of the Edinburgh sheds where they got it just about running but couldn't work out why it was running so poorly.  It was refused a works visit so Doncaster was called, and a fitter from Doncaster sent out.  He discovered the reason.

 

I'll do some digging and see if I can find it again.

Les

 

As to the Caley, wasn't it one of their sheds that didn't realise A4s had three cylinders all of which needed lubrication?

[Ozexpatriate]

Mr. Kolher's latest blog "A matter of opinion!" is posted.

 

In it Simon takes up his virtual pen to thoughts on canal boat holidays, what the term "modeller" might mean, and comments made regarding the recent "We all make mistakes!" blog.

 

I think that regular readers, particularly those who commented on the previous blog post may find it interesting.

 

Regarding "modellers", for my own purposes, I'm sticking with the term "model railway enthusiasts" as more representative of our broad church and one that causes little umbrage.  

[JSpencer]

What scares me is the proposal of Simon doing product reviews (various manufacturers) and posting them on a Hornby blog.

 

He might astound us with he knowledge of the model compared with the prototype, or the opposite could happen (I.e shows he knows little!) or it is rather generic comparison "....the Bachmann class 20 is more refined and detailed while the Hornby one runs better and can pull more.....". Which could eventually lead to things like "you will find Oxford's Adams just as good as Hornby's only cheaper..."

 

I like the blogs but not sure if "product review" will be a wise move and could lead to an awful lot of flak!

[Guest spet0114]

Had to smile at this bit...

 

"I agreed to write ‘Simon Says’ with the proviso that my copy was not edited or censured in anyway and without hesitation he agreed. Nat’s agreement was not hollow and I can confirm that apart from correcting the odd typo, Nat has stuck to his word. For those who know me they are aware that I am not one to actively critisise competitors..."

 

Clearly Mr Southworth hasn't got time to correct all the typos, just the odd one.....

[Legend]

I kinda lost my way on this one. Not sure there was a message in this blog.

[Ozexpatriate]

Not sure there was a message in this blog.

I'm not sure there needs to be. It's a blog after all.

[Hroth]

I kinda lost my way on this one. Not sure there was a message in this blog.

Step back and take the wider view? Possibly also "do something else now and then". 

 

Personally I liked the description of the Llangollen canal and crossing the Pontywhatsit aqueduct.  I've crossed it quite a few times on a trad-stern narrowboat, and the hint is to stand on the footpath side of the tiller...  Of course, Chirk aqueduct is much better from a railway point of view as the railway viaduct runs parallel and you sometimes get accompanied by a train whilst you chug across!

 

Apart from that, all narrow aqueducts, tunnels and staircase locks cry out for token working...

[jjb1970]

I think it is the fact that SK's blogs are as much well written recollections of his life on the road for Hornby and other musings as models that makes them so enjoyable to read. He is able to put the hobby into a wider context and yet also convey his passion for it. I think his musings on the difficulty of leaving work behind when out of the office will strike a chord with many, it is certainly something I am guilty of.

His comments about what is modelling were interesting as it is a subject we often see discussed on RMWeb. My own view is that the hobby is whatever an individual wants it to be, whether that be fine scale modelling or running a train set on a kitchen floor and everything in between and there is a symbiotic relationship between us all. I think it is easy to deride the train set world and locomotive collectors etc but these groups bring money into the hobby and help provide some financial health for companies like Hornby which helps to allow them to continue investing in new tooling and continued product development.

[The Blue Streak]

. My own view is that the hobby is whatever an individual wants it to be, whether that be fine scale modelling or running a train set on a kitchen floor and everything in between and there is a symbiotic relationship between us all.

 

Good work, that man !!!!

 

[ruggedpeak]

My own view is that the hobby is whatever an individual wants it to be, whether that be fine scale modelling or running a train set on a kitchen floor and everything in between and there is a symbiotic relationship between us all. I think it is easy to deride the train set world and locomotive collectors etc but these groups bring money into the hobby and help provide some financial health for companies like Hornby which helps to allow them to continue investing in new tooling and continued product development.

Too right. If it was all just finescale and rivet counters, shows would be much smaller, availability of models would be non-existent, there would be no RMWeb or a wealth of magazines or books, and the hobby really would risk dying out. Presumably most of those who criticise trainsets started out with a trainset as a kid. I doubt people who've never modelled before wake up one morning and suddenly decide to do a 3mm Finescale GWR branchline. It is only by having a broad base that all the specialist cottage industry companies can start and grow. It is Hornby who have innovated and leveraged digital sound with TTS in a simple and cost effective way, and to a lesser degree Bachmann with their digital sound trainsets at the price of a sound loco (when discounted !). They are driving the innovation that brings in new entrants, or shifts more 12v DC modellers to digital sound. Later it is the smaller firms who benefit as these modellers develop their skills and interests.

 

I guess it is a plea to some degree from Simon for people to take a step back and take a broader view of the hobby and their place in it before moaning.

 

Edited for spelling.

[JSpencer]

For me this tirigers is a new question,

 

In the old days, someone assembling a Hornby model was factory worker. They were designed with ease of assembly in mind and everything was quite big and popped together. Today we people assembling 100s in really tiny details, using tweezers, small amounts of glue across 100s of models. Would we call them model makers?

[Dunsignalling]

For me this tirigers is a new question,

 

In the old days, someone assembling a Hornby model was factory worker. They were designed with ease of assembly in mind and everything was quite big and popped together. Today we people assembling 100s in really tiny details, using tweezers, small amounts of glue across 100s of models. Would we call them model makers?

It's certainly what we would call ourselves if Hornby today's locos arrived as a big bag of bits instead of neatly packaged finished items. 

 

The way Tri-ang and Hornby Dublo locos went together was a straightforward screw-together assembly job, not too many parts and pretty much impossible to put anything in the wrong place or the wrong way round.

 

That's why CKD was possible then but would be beyond the abilities of most today.

 

John