adrianbs

Hi All, Very interesting photos of varying buffer heights but completely irrelevant to the question posed. To put the question in simpler terms in the hope someone will be able to understand it and be kind enough to provide an accurate answer I will post it in a different way. What is the centreline height of the Dapol milk tank buffer. An empty wagon should ride at 3' 6" buffer centre to rail whilst a full one with weakened springs will probably be as low as 3' 4.5" If the scale height is in fact about 3'8.5" i.e. 25.9mm+ then Dapol have made another faux pas by fitting the LMS size wheel ( 3'6.5") to a GWR chassis intended for 3' 1.5" wheels. This would be entirely plausible as the chassis is basically the GWR design where it can be recognised but clearly fitted with the larger wheels in axleboxes approximating to the plainer BR version of the LMS design. Hoping for a sensible answer Regards all adrianbs

PS How the hell did I duplicate the post and how do I get rid of the double adrianbs

Hi All Personally, no insult intended, I prefer the one I bought RTR for just a bit more than the Dapol one. Regards adrianbs

Hi All As long as he's happy, of course, one day, when he puts his glasses on ----- Has any one buffered up one of these milk tanks against another wagon with correct height buffers or is it just an optical illusion that the Hymek is riding rather low ????? Perhaps Dapol SHOULD have used the 3' 1" wheels which would have been correct for a GWR milk tank, just a passing thought. The easy solution will be to always keep the milk train on the down line of course !! Regards adrianbs

Hi All With regard to who has responsibilty for these seriously flawed wagon designs we have, as yet, not heard where the buck stops. Those who consider the original posts on this forum hold the clue, may now be rather worried about the standards that will be used on a certain huge new range of products. If it turns out that someone else is responsible, then this bodes ill for further Dapol models. The answer to the question I posed earlier, "Where is the vacuum cylinder ??" is:- THERE ISN'T ONE, This does leave you with the option of putting it where you want it, depending on what lettering you put on the solebar although the model is not supplied with a loose one to fit, nor a pair of steam pipes as far as I am aware. Peter220950s remarks about "Why are we all modelling to 7mm 32mm gauge standards instead of S7" are rather unnecessary as almost all kits can be built either way so you are NOT FORCED to use 32mm gauge AT ALL. Lionheart aready offer S7 wheels as an option on their wagons and have also produced some locos in S7. Modelling in S7 is mainly hampered by the lack of RTR points although handbuilding points is actually surprisingly easy with current components and allows much more flexibilty than a standard RH or LH point. Regards all adrianbs

Hi All I have just checked to ensure I have got the facts correct and can say now that 4 of the milk tanks are being supplied with none of the solebar lettering shown on the originally illustrated version, neither with all its errors, or corrected as one would have hoped. They are not being supplied with any transfers at all so at least those who want wagons with different numbers to make a rake will have no problem. I am not sure what those who expected the models to be fully finished for the money will do, there are, as yet, no sheets available so you will have the fun of hand lettering or buying expensive lettering sheets from Slaters just for the solebar. For those non-kit builders the choice will be, go without, or pay someone to letter and number them for you, ( about £30 each for professional work ) You will of course, have your choice of the big 4 or BR if you can do the lettering or get it done for you, but you will have to accept the "Genericness" whichever you choose. I am not sure if the original version is as shown or is going through the print department to have the lettering blacked out. this version is not listed by some retailers. Maybe returning the models as faulty will be the only option. Regards all adrianbs

Hi All With a bit of luck I might get this one post in before I get banished to the gulags again !! As far as I can see the current CADs are total rubbish, however as this is the standard set recently on the O gauge wagons I would be disinclined to believe that there is any real hope of improvement. I do have some knowledge on this subject just in case those who enjoy discrediting anything I post try yet again. I did take over the Anbrico Railcar and although 40 years old, at least, is way ahead of the Dapol model but was,nevertheless, not up to the standard I set for my new products. The patterns have been largely rebuilt including removeable side panels and new super detailed bogie sides. The original kit had no provision for the later condition with the panels removed and as they lasted much longer in the later style it seemed advisable to offer both versions. It is basically pointless as well as impossible to fit bogie sides on the original version as the side panels actually move on sharp curves to accomodate bogie swing as far as I can see. My colleague did most of the pattern work and this also included the new sides for the Parcels Car version which had never been offered by Anbrico. . A new motor bogie design was produced based on our OO tram chassis design but we then heard that Dapol were working on a GWR Railcar so the work was halted till we knew which. It was restarted when No 4 was chosen but then stopped when the same model as ours was chosen. I can understand why Dapol are having difficulty although not why they seem to have such an inaccurate set of CADs. There are no really accurate official full size drawings available neither in the published books or in magazines as far as I could find.. W4 in Swindon does exist and although not accessible for laser scanning, any competent designer would have more luck with that railcar than the later batch as there are none extant at all. Fortunately there is a good drawing of the bogie but of course this and the body drawings are useless if laser scanning is required to enable the tooling to be produced accurately. The front end shape cannot be accurately calculated just from the drawings especailly as the drawings themselves are rather suspect. I believe the front end panels are all basically made using single curvature sheet metal although the front of the roof is double curvature using canvas covered wood just like the Beaver Tails on the LNER. It might be possible with a competent solid modelling programmer to produce a 3D front end shape which matches the photos and the Anbrico model looked pretty good as it was,.just made by hand from flat brass sheet by Tony Colbeck.the original ANBRICO The front roof shape is more of a problem being double curvature with basically no dimensional details of the radii.being available. The timbers would have been curved and trimmed to match the gutter lines and centre roof profile, then shaved to give a smooth surface for the canvas. No doubt the roofs were shaped to match templates but would have varied slightly. Even the precise positioning of the roof vents is not clear, especially on the Parcels Car. I assume this will follow, if the sales of the first model are adequate although that will depend on the accuracy. Dibber25s comments on the recent O gauge wagons,( I assume he refers to the brake van and milk tank,) give the impression that the other 4 groups of O gauge wagons have been acceptable. In fact two are basically freelance and generic, one is seriously innaccurate whilst the other has only about 35 faults. At the moment some of us are trying to salvage the 7mm Terrier from a similar fate but Dapol are unwilling to discuss any of the points raised.so unless there is going to be some sort of Damascene revelation, I fear the Railcar may follow suit. At the moment it seems more effort is being employed trying to silence critics than producing accurate models. I wish you luck in your efforts but on past performance you are going to have your work cut out getting what you want. Regards all, adrianbs

Hi Andy, What's the latest, 12 months have gone by now and we are none the wiser. Regards adrianbs

Hi all Simond has shown some interesting photos above. This particular batch of wagons was built as 4 wheelers in 1927 as Dia O23 but rebuilt on new frames as Dia O44, Fortunately this was not the design chosen by Dapol, as the tank fixings are unusual. It was strengthened with the pairs of vertical solebar webs in BR days, as were many others, but still retains the original short lever DC brakegear which on later designs was replaced with long levers but using similar actuating linkage. Had Dapol chosen this chassis and an appropriate tank and cradle the tooling costs could have been reduced and the variety of authentic liveries would not have been restricted to one or two Non aurthentic liveries would not have been affected at all as, from now on, all their milk tanks necessarily will be non authentic. If anybody has bought one and attempted to dismantle it, I would be interested to know if the tank cradles can be removed from under the tanks or are integral with the chassis. It would mean optional versions were possible if so. Regards all adrtianbs.

Hi Raymw There's not that much wrong with the springs apart from the fact that LMS have 7 leaves and GWR have 8 and the model sems to have 7 but on a GWR underframe.which is lettered LMS ! It was just the weird optical effect you get if you enlarge the Dapol gallery pictures up to 400%. Regards 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

Hi Ryde-on-time I did say that not all models are as good as they should be so when you buy something you do what is always recommended, take the sellers details and if the model proves faulty you ask for a refund. If they are not willing to accept responsibilty, walk away. I have just returned a Dapol brakevan to Gaugemaster for a full refund inc. post as the model was not as described. Ebay has the same protection automatically so may be safer than a market trader who might dispute the problem. That is one of the reasons manufacturers and retailers get away with sub-standard products, Joe Public does not exercise his rights. It would not take long for companies or individuals to change their ways if customers behaved as they have every right to. People who struggle to make kits are often equally bad at knowing if an RTR model is good value for money. Two people on the Dapol Pillbox brakevan forum received models with bits dropping off, did they send them back ?? NO they did not, but were trying to repair them, possibly invalidating the guarantee. Regards all adrianbs

Hi all Mike Bellamy seems not to have read my post fully, I did say much of what is available as kitbuilt RTR is at similar prices to Dapol. My late friends wagons are being sold at around the same price for equivalent RTR types, obviously much more complex models will be more expensive but so they would be from Dapol. I recently purchased a 6W milk tanker and a petrol tank wagon for less than the price of a Dapol Milk tank. Since both were superbly made from the excellent Slaters kits they are extremely accurate and far better detailed than their RTR equivalent. On that basis I cannot see why they are not affordable. .The cost of "secondhand" wagons has only increased slightly in reat terms over the last 50 years but the standard has seen a dramatic improvement in that time, entirely due to the vast increase in the range of accurate kits. Even the least accurate kits are generally better than Dapol in that respect. Whilst not all S/H models are well built, those that are not, are often a cheap way of trying ones hand at modifying to get them up to standard. Many S/H wagons cost little more than a set of wheels and couplings but a bit of cannibalisation plus a few components added from the various accessory ranges can often produce very satisfactory models. I know because I do it myself if I see something suitable. Dapols entry into the market in terms of cheap locos has, as yet, had no effect, they have not yet actually got any into customers hands !! It is therefore difficult to assess how much that will grow the market. Ixxion have certainly sold a significant number of locos but are nowhere near the output of Heljan as yet. I am not sure that Heljan have, over the last decade, dramatically increased the overall market. They have certainly destroyed the sales of many kit manufacturers and seen off Skytrex in that sector, but the Guild membership has shown no great net increase, nor has attendance at the major GOG shows, It is pointless arguing that not all O gaugers are Guild members and that there may be many more non members, there are no figures available on which to base that. There have always been many non members either on cost grounds or by inclination and I have never seen any attempt to accurately show the numbers. Even rough estimates vary wildly from half as many again to 4 or 5 times as many.. As a quick reply to Mopar, Heljans models are a curates egg. I would have bought a significant number of the Mk 1 coaches but 1) they are inaccurate, 2) they are unsuitable for the period up to 1960+ 3) they have not produced a sensible selection of designs and 4) the length of time they will be available and the projected range is totally unknown so it is impossible to assess if the required types will be available when one can afford them or indeed ever produced at all. I have no interest in the diesels but I have heard about various problems with the gears and some small anomalies with the models themselves. In general the locos seem good value for money and fairly accurate overall. The new wagons I have no requirement for, but having examined one without having drawings to check against they seem to be a much better proposition that Dapol models but only suitable for the very late steam era onwards. Regards all adrianbs

Hi all Much of what jjb1970 says is very true but has to be considered against other factors as well. There is a huge amount of very affordable RTR O gauge already available on Ebay and also at the larger O gauge shows. Most of the equivalent wagons to those offfered by Dapol can be found at similar or lower prices and, provided care is taken with checking the standard, the accuracy and detail may well greatly exceed that of the Dapol model. Large collections of models come onto the market all the time, often as a result of age or the passing of a modeller, indeed one of my late friends has left about 150 wagons 50 passenger vehicles and 20+ locos. Almost all of these I would buy in preference to a Dapol model. There is much greater variety available since most are made from kits where the choice is in the hundreds rather than only a handful of RTR types, many are unique scratch built models or built kits which will never be available as RTR, no matter how long one is prepared to wait. Dapol's current introduction rate is running at about two new designs or less per year and this will no doubt drop once they have skimmed off all the cream of the models that will be profitable. There must now be in excess of 500 wagon kit types available already so it would take 250 years for Dapol to provide that sort of range. There has been no bar to modellers wanting to go "O Gauge" for some decades because they can't kit or scratchbuild, nor because they do not have deep pockets. Many modellers only start modelling at or just before retiring so the average life span of their modelling activities is probably less than 20 years. Their models are then recycled, some are scrapped, some rebuilt and new models obtained. I have no connection with the company but Powsides offer a far larger range of RTR PO wagons than Dapol, and at similar prices, especially bearing in mind the Powsides models are in general significantly more accurate. Nobody has run around like headless chickens saying Powsides are the best thing that has happened in O gauge for decades. Dapol have not added anything of great value to the range of models already available and the standards they have adopted have been well behind those of most existing products. Regards all adrianbs

Hi all One of the very first kits in O gauge was a Terrier, and it's still available !! There have been, I think, 5 more since and a 6th was on it's way. I guess over 1000 must be out there somewhere, although many may have been abandoned and binned. I imagine there must be demand for between 500 and 1000 more but only if another half dozen livery variants including IOW ones appear. I am not sure how much net profit that will generate bearing in mind that the equivalent of nearly 2 bodies and one chassis are needed to produce the variants. Even then I assume many locos will either have to have some anomalies or errors if additional tooling is not produced. It is difficult to assess how fast they sell after the initial rush, especially if Dapol's predicted price rise is significant. Dava is right about "One Shot" and if it is not right there may never be a later replacement, even in kit form Regards adrianbs

Hi Great Western, I've tried that, direct to RW, as I have known him from when he was still at Ratio. He is, as far as I can tell, being overuled and with regard to other models about which I have contacted Dapol direct the reply has been that thay basically say"thank you for your comments but we must be making satisfactory models because they sell well ". They have corrected a few inaccuracies on their web page but that is all so far. I wait to see if my assistance with the Hornby Magazine diesel brake tender bears fruit, so far there has been no further update and they have been somewhat evasive about any alterations. At the moment I am hoping to see if they manage to correct faults on the Terrier but they have made no comment, so far, about the problems that I have pointed out on the Prepro illustrations. The O8 appears to have been Laser scanned, from the early CADs, but whether what is shown on the CADs is translated into the model is still an unknown. The one and only CAD for the Terrier, that had been shown, has certainly not resulted in the prepro looking the same, you can check that for yourself with regard to the smokebox front of the A1x, indeed the model is no longer an I.O.W loco with extended bunker and original splashers.. If they show CADs which they do not use, or fail to give accurate information about their intentions, until it is too late, then they leave themselves open to any criticism that heads their way. Dave Jones appeared to be willing to communicate with modellers but comments which were made were not acted on. Whose fault that was I have no idea but if they were just paying lip service to the idea of participation, by those with the necessary knowledge, then it has backfired rather badly to the disadvantage of Joe Public in the main. Regards all adrianbs

Hi Dava, The Handel Kardas book is certainly a worthwhile addition but I am very suspicious of the front elevation drawing showing 50 /32650/Whitechapel/Sutton which shows a rivetting pattern not backed up by any of the photos of that loco in the various books in my library and differs from the model prepros which in turn differ from Bodiam. It also shows a very small smokebox dart boss like an A1 which A1xs seem not to have had. I have no idea what sources Dapol's model relied on but if accurate it is certainly atypical. The source is not one I have found when it comes to certain aspects of the detailing and certainly not for the A1x locos they have announced. The drawing is reproduced from the Colin Binnie booklet on Terriers which is very useful indeed but insufficient for an accurate RTR or kit 7mm A1x Loco. This I found out, following various safaris to the Bluebell and the KESR, when I went armed with photocopies of various pages to add accurate measurements and notes. As has been said on another forum it would be acceptable if Dapol made an accurate model of at least one particular prototype, preferably one which can be easily altered to represent others or is virtually identical. To make a model which has inaccuracies which are not found at all and which make modification extremely difficult is a great shame. They have left it too late to alter things, so it seems, but have not given modellers any chance to comment as they have altered the original 2012 CAD to produce the prepro which has only just been unveiled. The original CAD of the A1x was not good enough to see some detail and only one view was shown of an I.O.W version which has not been proceeded with in any case. They have just used the "excuse" that they had to make the Milk tanks "Generic" (i.e. inaccurate ) for commercial reasons so it will be interesting to hear their reasons if the Terrier also has unnecesary errors. I have 3 models on order but fortunately the 2 for me are A1s and the 3rd is for Portishead which will be having all the rivets removed, thereby making some errors disappear !! Regards all 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi Simond I am sorry you have been abused in this way after what I think is your first post on this forum. I am entirely with you but, like you, 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. Dapol's claim that it is a commercial necessity, and the reason they gave, holds as much water as an inverted collander with no bottom. They have produced 6 innaccurate model series to date although this is the first time they have come up with this excuse. The brake van was wrong because it had mistakes which it was too late to correct, so they claimed. The errors on the POWs have, as yet, not been explained away even when admitted. It will be interesting to see what the excuse is if the Terrier is produced as a "Generic" model with no single reasonably accurate prototype being represented. We have been shown prepro samples but there have been no replies when mistakes have been pointed out. This is exactly what has happened in the past and it is looking increasingly like the same fate will befall the Terrier. 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