YesTor

No disrespect intended, but pointing out that "the models are already made" seems a tad academic at this stage? We all realize that the models are finished, we really do. Equally, I'm sure everyone realizes that Hattons haven't created this issue (or any other) on purpose. What manufacturer would? My straightforward question was simply designed to help me decide if I could indeed purchase the model with said defect and assuming that no fix was to be made available, could I indeed fix it myself. No more, no less. It is worth remembering that if people verbalise disappointment then it is generally because they care, to some degree. Myself, like many others following the Class 66 topic, have made contributions and suggestions along the way and followed each step of the design and manufacturing process via the updates posted here and at Hattons; and naturally, as time progresses, all of these factors add to the general excitement/anticipation of the final arrival of the finished model. As it stands, I really would like a model of 66418 'Patriot', with sound, and all of the details and features which Hattons have naturally been hyping since the initial announcement. The model comes in at £265 and has taken near-on 2 years to reach its finale. I'd quite like the model to be right. Is that seriously too much of an expectation? Personally I think not. As it transpires the model has emerged with the odd glitch, and again I feel it is perfectly reasonable to request if there is, or intends to be, a potential solution. In response to, "What would you want them [Hattons] to do?" Well, as it is Hattons' model then I'd estimate that they can likely do more than anyone else. So from my viewpoint I'd guess there are several options really... Ideally administer a solution/'fix'/repair (call it what you may) prior to the despatch of said model(s). If the above is not possible/feasible then supply any necessary replacement parts at a later date so that the customer may, at his discretion, administer his own repair/modification. If neither of the above prove viable, then at some point provide sufficient information regarding the exact issue so as the customer can then decide for himself as to whether he can, could potentially, or even wishes to administer his own repair/modification at his own discretion. Indeed, based upon Hattons usual standard of customer service it may well be that some of the above options are already being investigated, as after all, the last thing that any manufacturer wants is returned or unsold stock. As others have said, I have no major qualm with fixing a model myself if it is a model I truly feel that I need, which is very much the case for me this time around. If however I had to administer a modification or repair on multiple versions of the same model (whoever the manufacturer may be), then I may of course feel a little differently. Unreasonable? Personally, I really don't think so. What I do find slightly more bizarre however, is what seems to be the suggestion that customers should not even be asking for possible solutions to these kinds of issues, as often seems to be the case when these kind of instances occur. Best Al

You might be in for a long wait judging by general progress on the Dapol 59, by which time 59003 could well be in a new livery by then anyway!

Thanks Dave, but this still doesn't provide any info as to where the actual fault physically is? A circuit board mounted within the chassis, or inside the body/cab? Or the wiring elsewhere? Some clarification would be useful, in that if I separate the body from the chassis am I then effectively left holding a faulty chassis, or a faulty body, or both? And as such, can the erroneous part(s) easily be removed or/and replaced? cheers Al

I'm a bit confused, so apologies if I am reading this all wrong, but unless I'm mistaken, if I specifically want H4-66-019, 66418 'Patriot' Freightliner Powerhaul with correct light formation - which I very much do - then I'm basically a tad stuffed? Sorry for the negative tone but I'm more than a little peeved if that's the case, and little point me shelling out £265 for a sound-fitted version if the lights are skew-whiff. If I may enquire, where exactly is the fault, is it the lighting boards themselves or within the actual wiring? And where is the affected board or/and wiring physically located, ie. chassis mounted or is it a board affixed inside the bodyshell someplace? The point I'm making is could it be a matter of swapping out the chassis for a fault-free one at some point? thanks Al

Agreed. Had there been no previous contract between the buyer and seller then a cry of "unsolicited goods" could very much come into play. By the very token that a similar order was despatched to and received by the buyer at around the same time, then it immediately becomes reasonable to conclude that this was a genuine error and the goods, if the seller chooses, are well within his/her rights to pursue. Whether in this instance of a £50 item it is worth the time and effort is of course another matter entirely.

Can you prove that the item was delivered and received, ie. did you ship via a 'Signed For' service? If you can prove that your 'recipient' has taken possession of said goods then in theory you are within your rights to request that the item be returned, (albeit at you the sender's expense and by means of organizing your own collection from the recipient and within a specifically stated time-frame). Alternatively, you may request that the goods be paid for should the recipient wish to retain them. Worthy of note... As there is in essence an existing contract between you and your recipient for goods already (and correctly) supplied, any additional items delivered in genuine error still legally belong to the sender; and as such if your recipient simply holds onto those additional goods with no intention of either returning or paying for them then technically this can be regarded as theft. If, on the other hand you have no proof-of-receipt, then sadly you're without a leg to stand on. A couple of interesting articles here... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37048351 https://www.saga.co.uk/magazine/money/spending/consumer-rights/can-i-keep-goods-delivered-to-me-by-mistake https://www.ft.com/content/021fc140-8ce8-11e3-8b82-00144feab7de A Google search for "recover goods sent in error" throws out a few more interesting (if somewhat conflicting) viewpoints too. Of course, ultimately the potential cost and hassle of recovering the item may prove to be more stressful than it's actually worth and as stated above it may well be a case of having to simply accept your unfortunate error, as frustrating as that may well be. If after all of the above you do decide to pursue a claim then it would be strongly advisable to do everything in writing and avoid any potentially unpleasant doorstep encounters. Another possibility is perhaps a polite phone-call, as most often people are far more obliging if approached in this manner than what seems to be the inevitable 'keyboard rage' that appears to exist between many buyers and sellers in today's digital environment. Best Al

By all accounts work on the 142 hasn't started yet as I believe that Charlie is snowed-under dealing with the Class 156. See Charlie's post earlier in the week... cheers Al

And just thinking aloud here also... might it be an idea to create some of those help pages as downloadable PDF documents, with a means of actually counting how many people actually download each one? Okay, whilst someone downloading a page does not necessarily translate into that person reading, understanding or acting upon said information, it will however provide some indication of which topics/questions prove more popular than others. Another option, without changing anything, would be perhaps to look at the website statistics of how many 'hits' each of your guide pages achieve in comparison to others, assuming that option is available to your website set-up? Or even providing a 'feedback' box that users could communicate via...? Unfortunately the majority of web users are straightforward lazy and unless spoon-fed virtually every step of the way won't type anything that they don't have to, so anything that can be provided to ease communication I suppose might help... cheers Al

Hello Martin, Just a little feedback if I may from a casual passerby and as a total newcomer to trackbuilding... I did some months ago begin looking at and start to experiment with initial usage of Templot. I must say that all of the links above were investigated and utilised in great detail and yes, they did indeed prove absolutely invaluable in at least getting that 'first foot' on the Templot ladder, so to speak. In fact, as I'd imagine with many first-time users, prior to going through those initial links/videos for that initial guidance I did indeed find myself staring blankly at the screen not really knowing where to begin. So whilst it's only an educated guess, I would very much imagine that many more do in fact make use of those guidelines than may make it known. I think that ultimately most people are very good at making good use of things without necessarily saying so, or indeed expressing gratitude. Perhaps an inherent defect of human nature more than anything... So, what did I do when I reached section 5 of http://templot.com/companion/templot_explained.php ? Well okay, its true to say that my heart sank a little as it was a case in my mind of, "What now...?". So, did I get around to asking when Part 5 would continue? Well, no. Why not, you may ask? Well, I guess I simply assumed that perhaps there is no Part 5 to be in the near future maybe. So what did I do instead? Well, the next logical step was to ask questions on here [RMWeb], at which point I recall being directed by yourself to the Templot forum, and I have to say that your subsequent assistance was absolutely superb at every step of the way... Would I have made equal progress if there had been a Part 5, 6, 7 and so on of the 'instruction guide'? Well, yes, I'm sure I would have, although as you point out, as we all surely make progress and understand guidelines/instructions at different rates, and perhaps just as importantly every one of us may have different topics and sub-topics that concern us, and yes, I can well imagine that with a subject as involved as trackbuilding appears to be, one could spend an entire lifetime writing an 'ideal' and 'complete' guide around the subject. I suppose the point being really is that it depends on where you feel that the 'Beginner's Guide' should suitably end, before perhaps being guided onto the Templot forum for more involved questions/discussion? Personally, I feel that as with most things, there perhaps needs to be just enough information in the public domain to enable the beginner to experience at least a reasonable level of accomplishment from the outset, and thus be left feeling sufficiently incentivised that he/she will be able to make further progress with further practice. I guess as with most things, there is very little more frustrating than being left with a feeling of hopelessness right at the first hurdle, as that can only lead in many to the urge to simply walk away/give up. So I suppose in short, if more information at the outset covering some of the more straightforward functionality of the program, that could potentially save yourself time and effort in explaining the same things over and over, then maybe that's a workable option for users, and indeed yourself? From my own perspective as a total newcomer, I do perhaps feel that an extension into Part 5, 6, 7 etc would indeed be very useful. How far do you go with that? Difficult to say, and I totally appreciate that no guide can be expected to be totally exhaustive of every topic, sub-topic and the like. Personally I found the guides with illustrations of the actual program/screen display to be more useful, as quite often a single illustration can do the work of ten pages of text, but then I am very much the type of person that prefers a diagram over pages and pages of complex instructions anyway. Whichever way - from Templot users that I have spoken to and also my own very limited experience - clearly a superb program by all accounts and my sincere thanks to the assistance you have provided so far. Best Al

Perhaps as I have to resort to informing my own customers from time to time, "They'll be ready when they're ready and not before...".

I'd imagine that this latest batch would have long been complete and already in a shipping container and on the high seas by the time it was realized there would be any issues surrounding axle boxes, liveries or otherwise. Likewise, I cannot imagine for one moment that someone will be sitting there individually unpackaging hundreds of models to inspect each and every axle box once they arrive in the UK either - although I could be wrong of course. We also have to factor in that any delay may well not be due to issues with the models themselves and could realistically be for any other logistical reason. In my own experience of importing/exporting products/shipments many delays are often due to HMRC, who are very much a law unto themselves and answerable to no one, and if not HMRC then any other myriad of logistical mishaps/delays that can, and usually do occur, for any expected/unexpected reason(s). Just my twopence-worth... cheers Al

Ummm, not so sure that's accurate... we had to wait something like five years after DB red 60s first appeared on the network before Hornby even thought about doing a DB version... and those are still available for sale even now. This year's announcement is only the second time a DB red 60 has been done, and in fact more accurately only the first time with the later DB only branding. cheers Al

That's nothing, I have in my possession an unlicensed butter knife, does that count?

Possibly, although I'm more inclined to think that by having the steps fixed onto the chassis would inevitably create an unwanted and unprototypical looking gap between body and solebar - very similar to the Bachmann model in fact, whereby the representation there often left steps etc at peculiar/unrealistic angles. So it seems Hattons have opted for the most realistic looking option. The chassis is indeed more-or-less universal, the obvious difference of course the variation between the two fuel tank sizes, but then there are also more subtle differences such as differently sized sandboxes for some later build machines etc. cheers Al

It has to be said that comparing the two I do find the bodyside-length join and nose join on the Hornby sample a little unsightly, to say the least. Let's hope that's merely a consequence of this being an early print...? The DJM version appears to capture the streamlined/aircraft-like appearance more pleasingly perhaps too... Still, early days etc... cheers Al

I don't know for certain but perhaps the nameplate is a later addition on the prototype? Al

Reasonable questions/concerns, although ultimately, as the saying goes, there's only one way to find out... So why not give it a go?! If you decide it's really not for you then you are perfectly free to delete your account, along with any personal information, at any time. And whilst it is always wise to execute some degree of caution when signing up to anything (whether online, or indeed any point of face-to-face contact, or otherwise), it is also true that there isn't necessarily a 'boogie-man' around every corner... Good luck!

...except for the various Greater Anglia / ONE incarnations, of course.

Good point. Fortunately, my models aren't subjected to the rigours of exhibition handling. To be honest, I'd say that whilst this might well be the heftiest locomotive in terms of weight, chassis construction etc, it is also undoubtedly the most delicate. I must emphasise though that this latter point is by no means a criticism, in fact it is more testament to the sheer wealth of detail that is present on the model, especially below the solebar, which of course is perhaps the most characteristic part of the Class 66 design, and in my view this has been captured incredibly well; and not to forget the very fine bodyside grilles, which really are superb. But yeah, in short, this sure ain't no model for the ham-fisted. With regard to longer-term reliability, well, who can say? As with anything new, I guess that only time will tell. Unfortunately, I literally sold the last of my Bachmann 66s only a few days ago, so sadly I am no longer able to photograph the two side-by-side. However, my personal observations were that both could be happily ran together without the feeling of either looking 'alien' etc. I'm a little annoyed with myself for not taking any comparison photos actually, oh well. To add, I'd imagine that the workhorse 'shed' is actually quite a challenge from a design perspective to translate into model form, as quite a lot of detail actually transcends between body and solebar/underframe - essentially right across the main joining of the two separating sections of any model locomotive. I've made various attempts in the past - some more successful than others - to improve the Bachmann model in this area, and from personal experience the most challenging parts have been the solebar and solebar-to-body areas. What does strike me though, is that the Hattons 66 really begins to feel more like a carefully engineered piece of kit, as opposed to simply a plastic train containing a motor, so in this respect certainly feels to raise the bar somewhat. That's not to excuse the livery glitches, as really these should have been avoidable, but then perhaps that's more a consequence of attempting to approve thirty-seven different versions all at one time, quite a feat for anyone I would imagine? If there are issues to resolve - as there often seems to be with the initial run of any model - then hopefully Hattons will address those, as I'm pretty sure that if they do this will be a benchmark diesel model for many, myself included. cheers Al

Unfortunately, yes. Frustrating really as to why this was completely ignored, the font for EWS and 66XXX clearly of the same style, weight etc... Whereas on the model the EWS is clearly much finer... I was initially pleased too that 66207 was chosen with its mismatched cab doors, but sadly these also seem to have been portrayed with only one cab door being mismatched when in fact both should be as such... Purely frustrating more than anything, as I'd planned on at least a couple of examples in EWS livery. Still, it hasn't detracted me from purchasing other liveries - and let's be honest there's a lot to choose from - as I do feel this to be an otherwise quite stunning model. The level of detail really is most impressive - the solebar area and bogies really are quite something, cab detail is really captured well with some really nice details inside, and the bodyside grilles do indeed look fantastic and far better/finer than I had anticipated, in fact. For me it's turning into one of those models that 'the child within' forces me to keep returning to for another 'peep', just in case I missed something... Remove the bodyshell and inside everything is very neat, tidy and very well thought through, such as the contact plungers bridging the electrical connections from chassis to roof, meaning there's no cumbersome wires to deal with when removing the body - a nice touch. The only part whereby I broke out into a cold-sweat was actually getting the bodyshell back on, as while the body itself is designed to simply slide and clip onto the chassis, the presence of the cab door steps/handrails hanging from the body itself means that all four step assemblies have to be maneuvered simultaneously (and rather awkwardly) over the chassis and are a very tight fit and additionally very, very delicate. I cannot actually foresee many of these oh-so-delicate parts surviving many bodyshell removal/re-assembly sessions. Although to be fair, it is difficult to see how this feature could have been designed any differently, as the steps/rails either need to be attached to the chassis, which would result in an unrealistic gap between the steps/handrails and the body, or mounted on the body itself resulting in the delicate assembly that we have. Tricky. Overall, from the four locos I initially received, two were returned due to being 'wobbly' runners (despite several hours running in of both) and I'm currently (and eagerly) awaiting replacements. The other two that I have here - now they've been run in at length - really feel to be substantial, weighty, and super-smooth-running models. When all is said and done, I've been harping on about someone producing a top-notch 'shed' for what seems like an eternity, so maybe I'm in a slight minority in being optimistically confident that once these apparent teething troubles are ironed out that these 'sheds' will be worth the patience that seems to be required in some cases. And now I simply can't wait for the sound versions! (PS... Dave, please, please, pleeeeease sort out the EWS fonts for the next run...?!) cheers Al

Fair enough, each to his own, although on the other hand I'm more than pleased that I did move all of my Bachmann 66s on... while the resale value was still high. I can survive a couple of extra months without a model.

Depends upon an individual's personal viewpoint I guess... modelling... or repair...? Either way, all of this sounds like a bit of a handbag fight and rather pointless? On a practical note however, I'd agree with the solution above, as I'm fine with accepting that any moving parts are always going to be susceptible to working loose over time, in which case - for a hi-spec model that I would imagine is to be part of Hatton's range for the foreseeable future - it would seem only reasonable to make these vulnerable parts available in the form of spares that may be purchased if/when required? What will be a bit naff is if the only future remedy would be to purchase a complete new model for the sake of a comparatively low-cost spare part... Otherwise quite a stunning model, thus far. Best Al

I'm not sure if that's good or not-so-good? I wonder what else will be the same as the original model... Still, with regard to the tilting maybe it's a case of 'if it ain't broke...'

Seems there's nowt premature about it's arrival either way...

Indeed. Direct competition is always bound to ruffle feathers, but without it Hornby may well have continued peddling their ancient Class 91 for another decade at top price, and perhaps similar too with Bachmann and their Deltic, 66, 37 and so on. I also doubt that Bachmann would have upgraded the Class 158 quite to the level that they have done had it not been for the fairly recent emergence of the super-duper Realtrack 156. New and upcoming manufacturers have to do something new and cutting-edge to get noticed, and by doing so their efforts force the bigger players to pull up their socks and take notice, or risk falling behind. At the end of the day it can only be good in terms of improved standards for modellers. Al