foggyjames

Thanks! cheers James

Well clearly I've also been living under a stone, because I had no idea that DCC-chipped models would move on DC, never mind sound-equipped ones doing their thing on that front, too. Every day's a school day! Great photos, all - keep them coming! cheers James

Fairly sure a colleague has a T-shirt from his time working at a techie at the opera at Garsington! cheers James

Impressive. Dare I say that looks like an O-gauge level of detail, at a glance? cheers James

I'm really looking forward to seeing a head-to-head Dapol vs Accurascale review, to see if my decision to hang on and not buy a Dapol example of Lydham Manor (in the hope that Accurascale a) will produce a model of Lydham, and b) it will be appreciable superior) was justified. The pics from the other day are lovely, and I'll echo the previous comments about the matt black smokebox looking outstanding. cheers James

Neat product! I've started investing in HLS Berg's Trainsafe Vision products. Investing being the operative word...😬 I've prioritised getting anything with a tricky tender connection out of its original box and into a 'tube'. cheers James

I took the references in the video to be referring to the faff of disconnection, rather than any particular weakness in the design. I have several locomotives from both of the two biggest UK manufacturers, which are a significant PITA to separate from their tenders - usually the electrical connection, rather than the mechanical link. That is annoying in itself, but the real pain is that I think every single one has packaging which requires the locomotive and tender to be separated. I've made it a priority to get those out of their original boxes and onto display so I'm not risking the fine detail parts inverting the things so I can get at the connectors every time I want to run them. I'm a dextrous 30-something with good eyesight. Goodness knows how someone less able (like my Dad), for example, is supposed to cope! My advice to Accurascale, if a complex tender-mating process is unavoidable (which I accept it may well be, especially with more advanced DCC functions), would be to make the packaging such that disconnection (at least of the electrical connection) isn't necessary for storage in the box. I appreciate that that too might not be possible, but I'd at least explore the option... cheers James

For the avoidance of doubt, I was talking about Hornby's HST in blue/grey/yellow livery (which I shouldn't be talking about here!), rather than what you guys are up to. I'm sure in the 10 years(?) that's been out they could have figured out that a) there's big demand, and b) found a production slot...as at the moment they're just leaving money on the table! Anyway - threadjack over - sounds like you guys have a good formula worked out, and I hope it continues to pay off. It sounds like it will. I will certainly be very interested to see the two new Manor offerings side-by-side. I have a hunch that, even though my preferred loco is available from the outset in the 'other' range, I'll be hanging on...! cheers James

Again, not looking to tangent, but if I were Accurascale and were doing market research, I'd be looking at: a) How quickly the first batch sold out, and in particular certain livery variants b) Used prices (eBay, etc). In the example I cited earlier, it's clear the market would stand a massively increased production run of that particular model (and it's been that way for years, with that particular model!). Not foolproof, that but particular example seems glaringly obvious to me. cheers James

Oh indeed, and I wasn't proposing a diversion onto other brands...just my way of saying that I think Accurascale are doing the right thing! cheers James

Thanks Fran - good to know. Frankly (and I'm not expecting a comment on this) I think it's utter madness that some brands limit availability (and in many cases enough time has passed that it can't simply be supply issues - it's either intentional, or incompetent). Demand for blue/grey/yellow-livery HSTs from a certain firm in Margate, for example, clearly wildly out-strips demand, looking at the used prices. cheers James

...and there is a market for even the crummiest of audio equipment! 😂 Many people are quite happy to admit that their ears are simply not particularly well-tuned, and that's fair enough. If on-loco sound does the job for them, good for them! At the risk of returning from my self-imposed tangent, Fran (et al)...is there likely to be a further run, representing other locomotives? If you're nearly sold-out, hopefully it isn't commercially sensitive to answer. If I'm going to buy a Manor, it would have to be Lydham. I can be patient...! 😀 cheers James

With hindsight, it seems a bit unlikely that I'd have been the first to think of such a thing...! 😂 cheers James

Danger of a tangent here, but... One of the reasons I'm unconvinced about DCC Sound in anything below O gauge is the lack of bass response to create a convincing effect. You can play some tricks, sure, but in the end low-frequency reproduction is really about moving air, and you just don't have the space to fit transducers large enough to move the required volume of air in the body of a OO gauge (or smaller!) locomotive, and the absence of enough mass (Accurascale's Deltic aside, maybe!) to stop the things rattling like hell if you tried / succeeded. Having said that, there are two possible areas which someone might want to investigate: 1) Some of the miniature loudspeakers found in phones and tablets (and, crucially, their control chips) are remarkable, and will easily out-perform a conventional cone speaker even several times the size. There might be some viability in someone looking into that in more detail. As it happens, I have been doing exactly that in a professional capacity lately...! 2) Our perception of directivity at low frequencies is quite poor (a function of the wavelengths involved and spacing of our ears), so there might be some viability in a fixed "master module" (loaded with appropriate sound profiles) which takes a DCC input and provides a summed version of all low-frequency audio demands from the layout to a line-output to a subwoofer which sits somewhere in the room. With higher-frequencies (think the "click' component of a door-slam, for example, rather than the "thud") providing the clues as to where the sound is coming from, the brain almost certainly wouldn't notice that most of the low-end is not localised to a particular model. I suspect it would work well for anything other than the very largest of domestic layouts. A product idea for someone, maybe? I accept royalties 😉 cheers James

Interesting, thanks! With hindsight, I think I did see a link to the Hattons comparison the other day, but didn't look at the time, and promptly forgot! Good point about variations, and that just changing the name and number isn't necessarily the whole job. I'm not really a rivet counter, but it's still worthy of consideration. Part of me is tempted to order Dapol's RTR model of Lydham just because the 'correct' loco is available, and consider adding a random Accurascale version (being less fussy about the example modelled) if the verdict down the line is that it's significantly superior. Similarly, I own Bachmann's models of 4555 and Dumbleton Hall (both in GW livery) - just because they were local engines. Dapol's Lydham is in BR livery, as is Hornby's 5239 (another local engine), but I am planning to represent both eras, so that might not be a show-stopper. cheers James

Hi All, I don't wish to be accused of bad etiquette in a manufacturer's 'trade zone', but can anyone steer me to a discussion about the relative merits of the Dapol and Accurascale offerings? I have my own thoughts on the subject (and am not proposing to start the discussion here!), but would be interested to read an existing thread, if there is one. I've so far struggled to find one, if it exists! Having grown up very close to the frequently-renamed Paignton-Dartmouth line, I'm keen to end up with a model of Lydham, which Dapol offer, but I'm tempted to get an Accurascale example renamed/renumbered. cheers James

Don't worry, I'm enjoying the discussion! I'll pipe up if I need anything! Waiting for a rainy day to have another crack at Templot. It's now installed on my main PC - I decided that was better for my patience than the laptop! cheers James

Thanks for your further thoughts, all! cheers James

Hi Wayne, I need a double slip because of space constraints regardless. My original plan used the RTL Peco slip (and turnouts) before I was even aware that free-form was an option, but curving it would definitely make the whole thing look a lot more natural, and hide the dimensional compromise (relating to a step in the wall it's hugging). cheers James

I only really have two 'lumps' of pointwork on my plan - a crossover, and a huge mass of a double slip and (from memory) two turnouts. The crossover could be from kits, (and even the Peco Bullhead turnouts would be very close to right, there), but the double slip / turnout 'lump' would significantly benefit, alignment-wise, from being done on a free-form basis. I feel like that's a bit daunting, and starting with the crossover would be more manageable, but that could be done from a kit - bit of a conflict there! Maybe kit-building that crossover would be a good stepping-stone? cheers James

An interesting development, and an interesting follow-up discussion! I'm still flip-flopping between Peco Bullhead (or potentially these new products) and going freeform via Templot. I feel like another crack at Templot is gettng ever-closer, as the weather gets more miserable! cheers James

These have now found their good home. Thanks all for your interest! cheers James

Little update - I was in a bit of a rush last night, hence the scarce detail! I got some dimensions for an interested party... Dims (approx, all in cm): Scenic board 1: 122 x 62 Scenic board 2: 118 x 62 Plain board 1: 76 x 61 Plain board 2: 122 x 61 Plain board 3: 95 x 61 (Flap hinge - drops down) cheers James

I have five modular baseboards going spare. Original donated to me from a now dismantled Continental Modeller -featured layout. I decided the dimensions weren't going to work for me, and it would be tricky to modify them, but I'm reluctant to bin them. I'm happy to pass on further details of the donor layout to the recipient if they want to know a bit more about the boards' former life! The layout was originally laid in HOm, but would suit OO well enough. There are two scenic boards, formerly a station area, plus three plain boards - I think one of a similar size to the scenic boards, and two smaller ones which together formed a lift-up access flap. I think the larger boards are something like 1400 x 600, but I can confirm for any interested parties. Forgive the vague details - they're a little well buried at present. Sadly I've used the frames and dowels with my replacement boards, but that could be easily addressed. Collection from Lincoln at your leisure, potentially Bristol next week (if you're equipped), or South Devon slightly longer-term by arrangement. I may be able to deliver for diesel money. cheers James

Thanks Martin - interesting! cheers James