GWR-fan

No, I will take a hit and cancel my purchase and lose my GBP30.00 deposit for a BR black model with Rails. As the loco is sold out at Rails in black then they will have no trouble onselling it. With postage the loco would cost me close to $300.00, making it the second most expensive loco that I have purchased after the Rails 18000 class gas turbine model. No doubt you will be happy when you receive your "Frankerfell" and every time you watch it run you will congratulate with adoration the manufacturer for his diligent research and full openness and transparency throughout the model's development and release.

Les, name me a model locomotive that has been released so completely wrong as the Fell has been? We are not talking about a few small details, we are talking about the entire side of a model. To remain in business a manufacturer and a small one at that, needs to retain credibility. Maybe this stuff up will make the manufacturer be perhaps less cocky when it comes to accepting research material in the future. How many fanboys will be so eager in the future to pay up front for future projects. You talk about "other models of types that we can only dream of" about, well no doubt not many were dreaming of a Fell back in mid-2020 that would be released with different body sides. There is no excuse for this failure. A kit manufacturer spent years researching the model before finally bringing the kit to the market. A new start up company does its own rapid research and after reading this entire thread, apparently ignored the input of others and then uses the excuse that full information only came to light after they had tooled the model. Is that their fault or the purchaser's fault? I am totally confident that Michael Edge knew what modification status the loco was at during its lifetime so where did he get his research material for his accurate kit? You talk about it being "highly objectionable" that some one would have the audacity to "nickpick" the model. Well, I find it totally disgusting that knowing full well that the model was completely wrong, the manufacturer went into damage control, being basically radio silent for six months or more and then only releasing two images mid last year both showing the same side of the model in BR black and green liveries.

So I take it then that when other manufacturers produce an alternate reality model then they will not be criticised but praised as in reality one is getting more than they bargained for. Hornby were "crucified" were locating a logo barely 1 - 2 mm too high into the cantrail on a class 60 and yet KR Models are praised for giving you two locomotives for the price of one. An established manufacturer would not have commenced tooling until all research had been carried out and after the error had been detected would have retooled the model to be accurate. As a purchaser we are not responsible for costs incurred by less than diligent research, so why should we accept an inferior model? We have a Fell "inspired" by the prototype. Even the "evidence" image released by KR Models showing the four vents/grilles in each nose section on the "alternate" side actually showed the loco later in its life with the centre coupling rod removed and yet they were using that image to justify each side being different. I find the three brass monkey attitude to this model not in character with the typical responses posted on RM Web where even the slightest detail discrepancy would be criticised. The KR cult has its fanboys who in the future will excuse the manufacturer for incomplete research in other projects. No doubt there will be those who will see my criticism as "highly objectionable". Well I find it objectionable that a manufacturer will incorrectly tool a model then go radio silent for months knowing full well that the model is wrong. In my opinion they have lost all credibility as a manufacturer. Of cause the fanboys will pay up front having little to no idea what a future model will eventually look like or how accurate it maybe. The early cads showed both sides of the loco but the manufacturer did not state that one side was the early version and the alternate side post modification, so a potential purchaser could be excused thinking that he was actually looking at the cad for as released and later inservice models and not the one alternate reality model. For the same money as the Fell one can purchase a well researched quality model from other manufacturers. As regards the chassis of the Fell well there is an underside image showing the drive to be a fixed four coupled design but no images of the motor/flywheel/gear train configuration. Given the radio silence on the body tooling inaccuracies what can we expect as regards receiving a thoroughly researched and designed quality drive? The fanboys will say, "Well don't buy it". Well, I will say that I have purchased it not knowing that the model is highly inaccurate.

A couple of years ago a UK seller had small decals that I needed. The GPS price to Australia for these GBP3.95 decals was GBP23.95. When I messaged the seller re the shipping cost he stated that he actually had no idea what GPS was charging for his sales. He edited the listing to RM postage and the cost was GBP1.95.

In this situation the messages received from the seller showed him to be abusive, aggressive and obnoxious. He got what he deserved. I can verify the condition the item was received in as I opened the packaging from the States and while investigating the cause of the sound malfunction I observed the corroded circuit boards. The item was sold as mint condition at a premium price. The seller's refusal to pay the return postage cost him plenty. In the States there are people who rummage and clean people's attics or basements or clearout deceased estates. Possibly the item was found as a result of such a cleanout and the seller had little money invested in the loco.

Look back a couple of years ago when a You-Tube "influencer" Intercity82 was Hornby's go to guy. Like some other well known influencers he was like the proverbial three brass monkeys, see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. I do not know if these influencers receive freebies for positive reviews but I would assume that any negative comments would see them off the Christmas card list. The Zoom calls are merely for show to impress someone higher up the food chain that the staff are active in promoting sales. Hornby's predatory activity lately has shown that profits are more important than actually taking notice of what customers are saying. The results of the independent consultations will finish up in a folder in the waste paper basket of the head honcho. It seems that Hornby want to talk to an extremely small group of people to gauge the feelings of the entire hobby.

Several years ago a friend purchased a mint condition LGB Mogul with sound from a seller in the United States. It cost him around $1000.00 including postage. He brought the item over to me to test and when we opened the packaging the loco had several detail pieces adrift. This is not uncommon with older LGB as the glue hardens with age and with just a gentle knock the part will come adrift. However, the "analogue" sound was faulty with the bell sounding constantly. The sound module was the older (pre-electronic) version comprising two large circuit boards taking up most of the space in the tender. A previous owner had left the 9 volt battery in the tender and over time the acid leaked out onto the circuit boards. My friend immediately contacted the seller and provided details of the faults on a model described as mint condition and that he wished to return it. The seller replied that he would refund him his money less original shipping cost plus my friend pay for the return shipping. To return the item would cost around $150.00usd. My friend raised a dispute with eBay for item received not as described and told the seller to pay the return postage. In several abusive personal messages the seller advised my friend what he thought of the whole deal and refused to pay return postage. EBay gave the seller a couple of days to oblige with the return postage cost. The seller refused, eBay refunded my friend his total outlay including original postage from the States and told him to keep the expensive locomotive. The seller lost everything. A bit of glue fixed the cosmetic items but the sound fix required new circuit boards from Germany for around $100.00. After that the loco was perfect.

You asked for an image of both sides. Edit: I have bought it

Les, rather than a model for all seasons the manufacturer could have released a model that covered a narrower timeframe and have been reasonably accurate. The manufacturer though chose to offer two liveries with the one body shell, whether accurate or not. I would have been more than happy with a model depicting the circa-1954 images showing the loco being dragged enroute to an exhibition (page 21). It would have narrowed my timeframe but the model could have been more accurate. To condone the release of a "generic" model because it was less expensive than a more accurate model takes us back to the early days when the likes of Lima and Hornby simply applied liveries to depict different models regardless of accuracy or not. Of cause if say Accurascale, Hornby or Bachmann had released the model in the guise that the current manufacturer has would the same fanboys have been as congratulatory. Look to the flak that Hornby received about twelve months ago when a logo on the side of a class 60 from memory was about 1 - 2 mm too high into the cantrail. I believe that Hornby released a supply of replacement bodies to correct the issue. Full kudos to the manufacturer for attempting to model the prototype, but before commencing the design work did he stop to think why no other RTR manufacturer had touched the loco?

If you were to look at a posting on Page 21, just one page prior your posting then what you have asked for is given with two large images showing the loco from both sides. The same wagons and locomotive are positioned at each end so it is highly unlikely the loco was switched ends between the images. The member suggests that the loco was being hauled to an exhibition circa-1954. What the EP, cads and livery examples supplied by the manufacturer show is that the model was perhaps "inspired" by the prototype. Being "uneducated" in the details of the prototype I was prepared to accept the model as it has been produced and assumed that the manufacturer had exhausted all avenues of research prior developing the artwork and tooling, but if I had of gone through and read this thread before placing a pre-order then I would not have laid out any money. It would seem that the model as presented represents the changes carried out through its lifetime portrayed on the one body moulding. It is not a mystery to me now as to why there have been so few images released of the model. Edit: The manufacturer on page 8 of this thread at the bottom has supplied an image to support his view as to the different characteristics of each side of the loco with large grilles each end side of the nose on one side only but ignores the lack of the centre coupling rods on his supplied image and also the absence of a date to indicate the actual state of modification to justify his claim. The two images shown on page 21 of this thread with the same wagons coupled at each end of the loco would indicate that by circa-1954 the body sides may well have been similar (possibly symmetrical) to each other. I keep reading that the Fell is a minefield and most likely the reason no RTR manufacturer has gone within a barge pole of it, but that does not excuse a manufacturer to release what appears to be a generic shape incorporating a seeming lifetime of modifications on the one model.

I would look at the issue of what is a model and what is not. We could have a "scale" model railway that attempts to recreate in scale a particular railway operating company in a specific setting within a specified timeframe. We could have a model of a railway where one's preference is to run assorted stock on a scenicked layout which may not reflect the scenery found in a particular part of the country. We, in general, have an assorted range of locomotives and rolling stock and it would seem that to be classified as a model railroader then we must have multiple layouts, each depicting the specific area and period in time to reflect our models otherwise we are classified in the train set category. For the most part what the "scale" railway modeller ignores is the compression required by necessity to represent the area he models and just as importantly the "narrow" gauge track that he uses to represent a standard gauge railway. Over the years I have visited many people's layouts with many with beautiful scenery and trackwork and yet surprisingly the layout that I remember most fondly was a large layout that was basically track laid on bare boards with no ballast then the whole layout painted over in a cheap paling fence brown colour paint. The "layout" featured just a turntable, an engine shed and a couple of basic stations and signal boxes. The major reasons I liked the layout was firstly the friendliness of the elderly owner of the railway and secondly, everything worked perfectly.

Had a similar situation with my B2 Pecketts. The locomotives would run fine in one direction then stall in the opposite direction. The thin pickups would protrude out through the spokes causing the mechanism to lock up. The pickups on the B2 were very, very fragile.

Somehow, I see Sam's target audience as not relying on RMWeb members to get his regular monetised return. Did you miss the point that Sam purchases a wide variety of models for the sake of reviewing them not because he has little to no knowledge of what types were used by specific railways? I believe that he has sufficient knowledge to be able to actually identify a railway operator by the livery. Sam is a reviewer, not a modeller. If Sam followed your logic then all his locomotives and rolling stock would be native to the Island of Sodor.

I fail to see how lack of prototypical knowledge impacts on the credibility of a review of a model reviewer. Unlike many he is not fixated on a rivet being misplaced or overlooked and I do not believe that he actually rates the model when comparing to the prototype. He does give some detail as to the history of the model represented and like many others who refer to online information or actual information on the manufacturer's packaging there may be inaccuracies quoted. However, how this refers to his credibility with actually reviewing the model is beyond me. Apart from those who simply have to have the latest releases no matter what the cost, I feel that most of us do use the cost of the model as a guide when purchasing. Sam does regularly criticise the major manufacturers over the price of their models but he does have justification. The Hornby 12 wheel restaurant/dining car and autocoach are two examples of price gouging. Apart from the replacement of the original plastic wheelsets for metal versions, the models' lineage may be traced back to their Airfix/Dapol roots. Surely the tooling costs were amortised decades ago and yet these models are as expensive as the latest tooled very highly detailed coaches from Hornby. Also the original dining car came with a spare underframe without the sill cutouts.

Last year I built a very expensive 1.3 metre RC high speed electric boat. All up cost around $4000.00. The large 56 series brushless motor was fed by four LiPo 5 amp hour 4s (around 16 volts each) batteries with two each side in series giving 32 volts and then paralleled to the speed controller, thus 32 volts at 10 amp hour capacity with very high discharge rate (around 100C). Each side electronics had a capacitor bank, each consisting of four 63 volt rated units. After final testing I had left the cells connected in series each side but disconnected the leads to the speed controller. Theoretically there was no electrical circuit. I then placed the canopy on the boat hull which seals the boat giving a water tight install. About 45 minutes later I sensed an intense burning odour. On removing the canopy the air was filled with acrid smoke and everything inside coated in carbon dust. One capacitor bank was totally destroyed with just the bare carcass of each capacitor and the remnants of the destroyed circuit board remaining. Adjacent wires were also destroyed. Obviously, there was a circuit created which bled down the two LiPo batteries on the affected side at a very high discharge rate. Fortunately, the hull was airtight and it was this that more than likely saved the boat from total destruction. All I can conclude is that a short circuit existed in the factory capacitor bank as the outlet leads of the bank were not connected to anything and securely isolated. A lesson was learned to never leave LiPo cells connected to the circuit when not in use even though in theory no circuit existed to cause the meltdown. All is well that ends well as my son had a spare capacitor bank, so after a lot of cleaning and replacement of affected wiring and an adjacent speed controller cut off switch which was destroyed, the boat was good as new. Fortunately the $500.00 speed controller was not damaged. Also the LiPo batteries on the affected side ($150.00 each) were not discharged below their low limit and so were OK to recharge. Seems likely that once the capacitors and circuit board were damaged the short circuit no longer existed and thus saved the expensive LiPo batteries.

I was thinking more along the lines of a few models being available for review from the usual suspects. Apart from the Easter bunny miraculously delivering the models then the models would have needed to have left port in January at the latest to "guarantee" a delivery over Easter. Recall that the member was told that he "could" have his model by then. If the models did actually ship in January I am surprised that no Facebook posting was made to that effect as no doubt those who have purchased the model would have been delighted.

Over sixty years ago I recall as a child my face pressed up against the store's window as I drooled with envy the "HO" and "HOn3" brass Shay models on display. Alas, each model was then a multiple of an adult's weekly wage.

Perhaps some models are being airshipped and not the normal shipping channels. For the container shipped models then they would need to have been shipped in January at the latest to have any chance of being handed out in late April/early May.

I do not have the prototypical knowledge to know if the Fell is accurate or not and in reality as long as it is "inspired by the Fell" then I am happy enough. I will be happy if it has a passing resemblance to the loco and view the model as say a Lima body on hopefully a decent enough chassis like say that made by ViTrains. As the first "diesel" outline model from the manufacturer then more technical information I believe should have been made available so that purchasers could gauge the direction the design was headed. Apart from "metal chassis with double flywheel motor" I have no idea what to expect. As I have asked before is there an image or drawing of the chassis? Is the drive mechanism articulated or a fixed four coupled design? If the model was being made by Heljan or Bachmann then I would have no issue with the lack of information available as both manufacturers have previously released many diesel outline models and we know basically what to expect. With the Fell you cannot even get basic information on their website. Since the pre-orders finished the model has vanished from the site but for one newsletter where mention is made but is lacking in any detail. Apart from a cryptic "production is completed and delivery is expected after Easter" message a couple of weeks ago, the last reference to the model from the company was a Facebook post from June 2021 where "the model is ready for production". An undecorated pre-production demonstration model was released in a video highlighting the sound decoder features, but apart from the model stopping and starting and running at speed there was no indication of what to expect as regards the mechanical design of the model. I have no interest in DCC sound so do not care how accurate the sound file is. Recall that the first release GT3 was beset with a few gremlins like issues with the electronics and assembly and design issues resulting in changes to the second run plus replacement parts being offered for purchasers of the first run model. Hopefully, more development will have gone into the Fell to iron out any problems prior production.

That "working" valve gear mechanism was once the bees knees when Bachmann released their 1/20.3 scale Shay around twenty years ago. Amazing to see a working mechanism in a 1/87 scale model.

The intense interest that both Hattons and Rails have shown in acquiring pre-owned collections is indicative of the health of the second hand market, even given the ridiculously high prices now being charged for some items. I saw a recent 20% off link to Rails eBay site and was astounded at the prices being asked for the models. Current secondhand prices have reflected the increased prices for newly released items, with some items like wagons and coaches almost double the new price when released barely a few years ago. A year ago I almost switched over to "O" gauge as the price of new "OO" scale items were approaching the price of similar items in the larger gauge. Apart from a recent purchase of a class 18000 turbine and a deposit on a Fell, I have not paid more than GBP100.00 for a new loco. (I did pay recently GBP102.00 for a much wanted later release pre-owned Hornby 72XX in GWR livery but that price was reduced when VAT was removed). I am very astute when it comes to how much I am prepared to pay for a new model, but limiting how much that is has not prevented me from getting some nice models recently and surprisingly all from local Australian retailers with a "Clan Macdonald", two Hornby class O1 locomotives and six B2 Pecketts. I am not attracted to the big expensive recent releases, preferring instead the Sanda Kan releases from many years ago. The hobby is only as expensive as you are willing to make it. Look to the upsurge in interest in You-Tubers who run mostly older or Railroad stock and whose layouts are reminiscent of the layouts one would have seen in Hornby layout plan booklets with track on bare boards. There is also an upsurge in viewer interest in You-Tubers whose channels repair older stock. There are of cause the collectors who will buy no matter the cost and those who simply must have the latest release no matter who the manufacturer may be.

The last participation on Facebook relating to the Fell that I could locate on a Google search and then tracing back through his Facebook account was back around June last year. Other models have featured since but it seems that a model "ready for production" the middle of last year has not been reported on since, until a recent newsletter stating that production was completed and delivery expected after Easter. Perhaps there was nothing to actually report upon but then there are a lot of details about the model's construction which would have been of interest to many who are purchasing the model.

To what extent has Rails taking up retail sales of the Fell contributed to the "shedloads" and actually making the project viable? Personally, I would never buy on the pay now plan from any manufacturer, whether he be established or a crowd funded kind. I would though pre-order on a deposit (even if a little more expensive) from a retailer who has been around a few years. The "emperors new clothes" syndrone that followed Dave to his demise seems to be alive and kicking.

I believe that you are speaking metaphorically here as apart from administration, everything else is offsite. Wharehousing and even distribution seem now to be third party concerns. Hornby even use a third party shipper to handle its own internal online sales. Basically, Hornby ceased being a manufacturer (well apart from a few easy build kits manufactured in the UK) and is predominantly a commissioner of models. They do input research material on new production but from what I have heard the Chinese manufacturers want more control over that phase of production. The Chinese "model" is to own both research material, cads, etc. and tooling and then so called "manufacturers" contract them to produce the item. The Chinese cover costs right up until the goods are ready to ship to the "manufacturer".

Remember that the current brandname "Hornby" exists only due the failure of its predecessors. Too many view the company with rose coloured glasses, fearing that the collapse of the company will result in the failure of the model railway hobby in general.