Wheatley

Maybe so.....but this guy obviously knows his market

I'd be interested to know where in the country he is located.My local dealer (in Devon) stopped getting in pretty much anything LNER / Eastern Region some time ago unless pre-ordered.

Ah, that's a good point actually, mine is firmly in LNER territory.

Some food for thought.Just called in at my nearest model railway retailer ( 5 miles ) who is a Bachmann stockist amongst other makes.Asked if he had any of these in yet. No he said.Won't be having any either unless to special customer order.Too expensive to stock and won't sell . I normally avoid comment on prices but this rather took me aback so I thought I'd share it .....without further comment.

Conversely my local retailer has sold out and re-ordered twice now, I had to wait for my BTK to come back into stock. The equivalent Comet kit is 45 quid plus maybe a fortnight's worth of free time to build it. Life's too short for that - my two Thompsons will go in the rake almost 'as is' with some re-profiled Hornby Gresley coaches, the time saved means I can concentrate modelling time on building things that RTR doesn't do.

I believe (at least some of) the trains ran whether there was a load for them or not. Given the state of industrial relations in the car industry at the time* you might get away with empties in both directions.

(* Or was that all a bit later ? I was 4 months old when the Waverley closed)

Stunning flush glazing, the correct (and very noticeably different) roof profile, proper vents rather than representative blobs, full complement of buffer beam and coach end appendages including optional buckeyes and vac/steam heat pipes, full underframe detail including longitudinal vac pipes, part of the brake linkage represented under the floor and a first class paint job.   

Nothing crude about it either, looks like a bog standard Thermit weld.

I don't think that means procedures for doing the job, rather it's adhering to the letter of one's employment contract, rather than what most of us do which is a bit extra or some duties we're not legally obliged to undertake to get the job done.

Exactly, the 'rule' in this case is your conditions of service, not the Rule Book ! It's not doing things like discretionary overtime, working your booked rest day, agreeing to having your shift swapped at short notice etc. If you suddenly start working to the Rule Book when you haven't been before you'll very quickly be on the carpet.

A straightforward example in this context would be agreeing to be 'stepped up' to work a slightly earlier service than the one you've booked on for to cover for a missing colleague. Someone else is then 'stepped up' to cover you and so on until either the traincrew supervisor runs out of bodies or the errant colleague turns up having mended his puncture, remembered what shift he's on etc. It happens all the time in normal working.

.

Vistiaen, on 17 Mar 2017 - 18:54, said:

Us RM'webbers are a fickle bunch.

No, I think I've been consistently anti-anti-rivet-counter.

Dave(1562) is entitled to his opinion of the model, it's certainly very pretty. What grates is the view that because he's satisfied with it then no-one else is entitled to express a contrary opinion. If he had said "I'm very happy with it and XYZ doesn't trouble me" that's fine, but his inclusion of the word 'bitch' twice in that context suggests a certain lack of tolerance of those doing the criticising.

I'm not for a minute suggesting that any other manufacturer is perfect, every RTR release does indeed have issues (possible exception of Hornby's Peckett which seems to be heading for some sort of model railway sainthood) but I'm grateful to the rivet counters and subject matter experts who point out any issues and allow me to make an informed choice on purchases. Some 'issues' bother me, some don't, I can either ignore them, correct them, or build my own. I can overlook the fact that Bachmann's BR cattle van is a scale foot too long for example because the rest of it is very nicely done, but their squashed LMS van really annoys me despite its correct length underframe. But it's my informed choice, and it's only informed because someone took the trouble to cast a critical (in the literal sense) eye over it.  

It's just a pity that so many of those prepared to critically evaluate products (even the slightly annoying ones) have been routinely shouted down on here so often, for so long and by so many  that they've taken their bats elsewhere.

not going to bitch about wonky plates, wrong wheel dimensions crap running or other blah, blah, blah, faults and rivet counter bitching

That'll save manufacturers a few bob in the future. "Accepting whatever-you-care-to-throw-at-us Standards".

Good.

For Kenton's benefit, the offence was  "endangering the safety of persons being conveyed upon a railway" contrary to Section 34 of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act. It is an absolute offence, there doesn't need to be a complaint from an aggrieved party.

JSpencer, on 11 Mar 2017 - 22:21, said:

DJM are the only make making it easy to fit DCC sound in these small engines while other makes cram weight in leaving DCC sound people to be inventive.

In a working model, surely function has to be a given and everything else a nice to have ? There were similar comments about the O2 that the weight was too far back.

As explained and Illustrated at 4 mins 20 sec in this film.

"A beam of light projected onto the plate ensures accurate positioning..." and it's accurately positioning it onto a mark made by two blokes with a bit of chalked string ! Love it !

Just after someone suggested there was no need to panic.

then thats even a more unfortunate situation were products to disappear

it doesnt take vast amounts of cash , but I think the various gauge societies should ensure that the key components necessary are protected from business failure or arbitrarily disappearance , thats my view

It's very noble of you to explain to these societies which you won't join exactly how they should protect your access to things they don't own or control. I'm sure they'll fall over themselves to comply.

sharris, on 06 Mar 2017 - 12:07, said:

If one is to try to do finescale track modelling, I don't think it should be a requirement that one joins a society to be able to obtain parts. 

 

 

Why not ? the alternatives are that either I as a society member provide the initial capital up front to supply the shop and keep it stocked (via my membership fees) or that a private individual provides the initial capital to supply a shop and keep it stocked, on the off chance that you might want to wander in occasionally and buy a packet of chairs. That doesn't seem fair either.

The Scalefour Society clearly show that selling to the public can be viable but it doesn't follow that the other societies should have to follow suit. All the scale and line societies began because like minded individuals got off their a**es and did something about something  they cared deeply about. It's entirely up to them whether they share that with outsiders or not, and how.

But entirely suitable as an 'owner retrofit' replacement for lead if you are prepared to source your own and shape it to fit, a job impractical on cost grounds for the manufacturer.

For anyone who fancies a go, here's a guy taking more than two minutes and using half a grinding disk to get through a bit of 6mm tungsten rod. Compare with the 10 seconds it takes to get through 8mm iron afterwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDlRqIZH7Js

...it's not an issue that I have to deal with

If he's a news agent he should be selling them in his shop at rrp not scalping people online! In my view!

Maybe both the people in Balloch/Alexandria who wanted one had bought theirs and he was wondering what to do with the other dozen cluttering his shop up ?

jamie92208, on 20 Feb 2017 - 17:34, said:jamie92208, on 20 Feb 2017 - 17:34, said:

I see that there is mention in this document about the windows breaking and passengers being dragged through them and being killed. This has become a factor in accidents since toughened glass was introduced. Surely laminated would be better to keep the vehicle interior intact and thus to try and prevent people being dragged out of the vehicle.

 

Jamie

Laminated glass has been specified since 1997,[Edit - on heavy rail]  initially with two or three toughened units per vehicle to allow escape. GM/RT2100 currently mandates laminated glass in all publicly accessible areas for exactly the reasons you describe. The 'break glass' hammers should all have gone too. As well as the risk of ejection there was also a risk of uncontrolled evacuation by passengers onto adjacent open lines as demonstrated at Maidenhead and I think Ufton Nervett ?

90Tank, on 12 Feb 2017 - 22:59, said:

And before any one says stop moaning buy a Hornby King, yes thank you I can but why would I want to invest in an 8 pin model change the name and running number when I have pre ordered a 21 pin high end model with the right name and running number.

Because the former exists and the latter doesn't, which makes the name, number, and number of pins somewhat academic. Depends how badly you really want a King I suppose.

I recently bought Hornby's Lyddle End East station buildings and Home Farm building to go with my Bachmann's Ais Gill signal box and I was wondering if they all can be adapted to do a N gauge version of Dent?  I realise the the station building would have to be repainted as the real Dent station has a reddish brick colour.

The station building is the same basic "small" design as the Lyddle End one, with an extension at the south end. Home Farm is clearly different to the S&C SM's house but if you repaint to match then they would all look part of a whole. Dent is stone but is a brownish/greyish sandstone, not quite sure what the Hornby one is trying to portray ! Even the stations further south in the limestone dales aren't that grey !

JSpencer, on 11 Feb 2017 - 18:53, said:JSpencer, on 11 Feb 2017 - 18:53, said:JSpencer, on 11 Feb 2017 - 18:53, said:JSpencer, on 11 Feb 2017 - 18:53, said:

The problem with a pole here is that it does not represent the entire market.

 

But unless someone has posted a link to this topic from the N-Gauge Society forum, for a crowd-funded model it probably does. As far as I'm aware DJM doesn't advertise anywhere except here and his own site, and anyone reading Hattons' and Kernow's ads and the odd bit of supplier news in the mags could be forgiven that he was OO only. Impluse buys from people seeing a model sitting on a shelf or in a dealer's ad are not an option for crowd-funded models, you have to know about it up front.

Agreed though that the "no" option is a bit pointless without being qualified. "No because I model the LNER in OO" has no relevance whereas, as you say, 80% of N-gauge modellers voting "No" would be more useful.

True but it's been left dangling there is the possibility of an OO one going ahead. All we need is for someone to clarify if and when

I either did not explain it clearly or you missed the point. ... put ALL the parts on one fret rather than raising production costs by having a bespoke fret per coach.

If that's the intention then I missed the point, apologies. Presumably each 'family' of coaches has its own chassis sprue - it would be relatively straightforward to make a generic Stanier chassis for example with different trussing for the 57' and 60' versions as the battery boxes dynamo, bogies and brake gear etc are common, but more difficult to then include all the various different bits for other companies' 57' and 60' designs.

A bit like Parkside where so far I've managed to make 4 free BR Standard vans out of all the spare bits ...

Coach bogie, on 31 Jan 2017 - 12:36, said:Coach bogie, on 31 Jan 2017 - 12:36, said:

Fret 1 Underframe (standard to suit All types, can suit more than one length, crease in fret to cut away to required coach)

 

Fret 2 Ends and roof with associated detail. (standard to suit All types, can suit more than one length, crease in fret to cut away to required coach)

If your target 'average / newbie modeller' is satisfied with one size suites all/none chassis, ends and roof then they'll be satisfied with the older generic Railroad RTR coaches and won't buy your kit. And those who aren't satisfied with generic chassis, ends and roof won't buy them either.

34theletterbetweenB&D, on 12 Jan 2017 - 10:53, said:

Built from accurately scaled parts to the correct dimensional layout of course there isn't a problem. After all the full size parts are all present on the prototype.

 

Follow on question: and what is the minimum radius on which the resulting model runs?

Considerably more than the two chains the majority of purchasers will expect it to run on.