Kenton

I don't think it is the name so much as the fact that no one has heard of the range of products. Even the posts above do not make the most of the potential awareness. OK I know that generally RMWeb members or 'management' are not in favour of blatant advertising but other suppliers have found a way. For example I have not seen (or remember seeing) any of your products being used in topics by members (your potential customers). I am a Gauge 0 Guild member but have not seen (or it didn't hit its target) in the Gazette. I also go to Reading almost every year but again, I am a bit more embarrassed to admit, I missed you at each one. So something is not working. I'll be first to admit that RMWeb or the Gauge 0 Guild does not cover all 7mm modellers but if Gauge 0 Guild is considered a platform to advance your products then surely RMWeb should be as well? Is there none of your customers on here who could post images and remark on a product? I'm still embarrassed that I have not heard of you as I thought I had covered most kit suppliers but then I have just had to google a link to your website. (again amazed you have not included it in your post above) http://www.ukmodelshops.co.uk/catalogue/furness for others to see. My comment on that is that there could be more detail - I didn't even know they/some/all were of brass without reading deeper and having your kit number at the start of a title line rather than the name of the kit may not be attractive to a customer or a search engine. When I look for a kit (I build for all regions and all eras) I am looking first for the name of the wagon - only when I am about to place an order do I need to know your catalogue number. I also know that hosting and maintaining a web site is not easy (or cheap) but is a 'directory' the best? Still now I have at least heard of you I'll look out at Reading. [Ed] Just looking at those web pages I came across http://www.ukmodelshops.co.uk/furness/kit/411 a very likely purchase as I know of someone who would probably want me to add that to his collection of Z2s (Scorpio Kit) and Z1s (WEP Kits) that I have built for him - though your Z1 must be pretty special at £55 to compare to the WEP kit at £45 and Scorpio kit at £30 !

perhaps I just have simple expectations. I think they have just settled into the rut of making big boxes which have room to spare for big motors and mechanisms. I'm not sure why they didn't simply do a covered version. I appreciate the detail in the trolley and understand the loathing of many to build from a kit. Especially as the availability (and final price) of a kit is too high. As I said I'm intrigued by the trailer as it may have potential in other models/scales maybe under 7mm Type 27 trolley? But it just looks wrong in 4mm. Respect to those who do just want a toy to have fun with just like Thomas & Co.

Not even damp That is a good example of jut how out of scale this model of a trailer is. The sides are too high and it looks just what it is (an excuse to put a big motor in something to push the real model along) On top of that as indicated above the trailers were not that common a sight. I'm sorry but IMO Bachmann have failed at the first hurdle when it really would not have been beyond their capability to have used a tiny motor. I'm still intrigued as to what the two screws are for on the trolley and how much space there actually is under there. But not enough to buy one.

So two screws to gain access to what under the trolley and one screw to gain access to the trailer (and probably a bit of moulding to break) So who is going to be the first to get inside and see if the motor is anything of any use on something more useful (in 009 perhaps) and to see what is taking all that space under the trolley - where a tiny Jap motor should be? The detail on the trolley looks really good - the trailer is a load of nonsense a contrivance to push/pull the real model not seen anything like it in reality (ok, I'm ready for the deluge of photos) but until then it remains what it seems - overscale and simply daft.

That's the south and midlands taken care of. But I guess the rails in the north, Scotland, Wales and the west don't need repairing so much. (less use ) But then we all know that maintenance crews in those areas are made of stronger stuff and can endure the more challenging conditions.

It has to be remembered that many of these so called "businesses2 do not conform to your definition. They are really little more than a hobby.They often do not set out with any intention of making a profit in any commercial sense and are often happy just to cover costs. Some may not even care about continuity or resale. Sadly for many they enter it with no business acumen; frequently are duped into paying far more than its worth by the previous owner; fail miserably in taking any business advice; and, simply do not care about maintaining goodwill or customer loyalty. The business they take on has often been badly managed, or run down, and they are overwhelmed by the mess that they have inherited. They sink into a depressed state possibly so ashamed of their folly and instead of seeking professional help, they retreat into a shell taking the business with them. I have seen it with good viable trading businesses, ignoring even official letter from HMRC, Companies House, even the courts. There is something about this type of business that seems to attract this outcome. It is sad for the wider community and sadder for the individual "would be" business owner. Although there can be no excuse for taking payments without supplying goods, or some form of communication, it is yet another symptom of this type of failure. That, is unlikely in the extreme. We must stop thinking that every business in our hobby regularly reads RMWeb. If they are not responding to direct mail then it is very unlikely they are going to respond to a "largely"/"understandably" negative topic on a forum that they are possibly unaware of in the first place. Interesting. Though a word of caution here. Is the address given a "registered address" or the "owner's address". The former has a completely different meaning to the latter. As an accountant my offices were the "registered address" for several of my clients (for a fee of course) This enabled them to keep "corporate" matters separate from their personal life. There are then many reasons why this may noo longer be valid. But in such circumstances if the "corporation" is defunct (not paying its accountant) the normal process is to return to sender, (assuming the sender has given a return address) or to forward to owner's real address. I am another who would like this range return to the market, but I'm realistic and believe they have gone the way of Impetus, Coopercraft and many others.

Now why would they do that? They make money by selling replacements to something that has a short lifetime.[cynic mode] and wheels that rust [/cynic mode]

I was not seeking "public justification" merely emphasising the point that rolling bars and many other tools that seem to be on folk's want list are really superfluous to the vast majority of kit builders. Even building the number of kits that I do, and being fortunate to have met Mr GW at a show and have several of his products, I use rolling bars so infrequently that they have a thick layer of dust. I would never even contemplate using them in 4mm for such parts as a cab roof, or boiler. But, heh, I am not trying to tell you how to build kits or how to spend your money. Just that if the rollers cannot be purchsed from GW because of whatever reason then there are alternatives and many people use them. No one is ever going to convince someone who is running a hobby business to accommodate all customers that have difficulty in buying their products. Especially if they do not even see such "complaints" (not everyone uses the internet and of those that do many haven't even joined or looked on RMWeb. (sad as that might seem). I understand the difficulties of getting payments from abroad, though I do not understand the self-imposed difficulties of those in the UK. For those in the US/Australia/Canada (.. other significant nations) I do have to ask what other modellers do - ether they manage perfectly well without, or there are alternative suppliers?

Just the thing for when that Jidenco* kit turns out to be impossible to build. * numerous other kits are available. Some of the best enjoyment/relief that can be found from some kit builds

As an afterthought I have to ask why do you need rolling bars for 4mm? Unless you are a professional kit builder, or build a similar number as an amateur, they really are not required. I managed quite well with a piece of springy foam (not soft foam) and a round bar (actually a sawn section off a curtain rail). add to that not every kit requires a part that needs to be rolled. It is a bit like buying a power tool before leaning the principles behind the hand held, it might be quicker but if it is only used once or twice for the odd job then it is a waste of money. (that could be spent on another or better kit. (one that comes with boilers pre-formed - most/many do these days). I'll add chassis jigs, rivet presses and even RSU's to the list of these nice to have but really unnecessary tools.

Perhaps you could get a copy of the Patent ? and make a copy from that disregarding any Patent infringement issues. There is a reason why Mr GW is besieged at his small stand at shows. His products are remarkably well engineered and WORK. But the chap is very much of another era - a most pleasant gentleman but I doubt if he has ever seen a computer (or wants to) So electronic and especially internet trading may well be out of his understanding. It is a very small "business" and the product range very small. I doubt if he even makes a profit (certainly if he factored in his time) so it is unsurprising that he cares if he looses an order due to non acceptance of electronic payment or the inability of a customer to be bothered putting a cheque or PO in the post. I guess that means that those who want his products will have to find some other way. Waiting for an unwanted one to come up on ebay (some wait as most who have one, and sent a cheque or queued, cheerish it) ; or find some old fuddy duddy (who still uses cheques and is UK based) to purchase oe for you. BTW I doubt if a patent was submitted.

As I said above and want to reiterate the name is undefined (certainly was not conclusive) and the "standard" for want of a better term is still under test. It is certainly flexible as we saw at the meeting - eve the height standard was to some extent "flexible" and the width most certainly was. The big point that was made was that the standard was very accommodating as long as everyone involved wanted to be that way. I hope it remains that way for a long time. General, flexible and accommodating. Sure, there has to be something and if someone builds a module that stands at 2ft off the ground then they can expect problems. By my inclusivity hat will take over and I'll be looking for chairs/books/tool boxes anything to get their effort up to the same approximate height as the others. I guess we have wandered off topic (oh dear my fault again) and we should be discussing this in the general forum where other posters are more likely to spot it and get involved. Part of me is fast coming to the conclusion that we are just chewing the same fat with the same old contributors who are either pro or against the concept. Going round in the inevitable ever diminishing closed circle of posters. Never getting any of the other many thousands of silent RMWebbers to ever contribute to the discussion let alone build a module. Is this really what it feels like to model in P4?

DM It isn't just about "fun" and the implication that the European or US Fre(e)mo followers do not have fun. It is more about a road to somewhere and why deny us some fun getting there. If part of that is laughing at ourselves "calling it Dave, or whatever" then who is to say otherwise. The "vote" on a name was never really concluded - part of the reason it is mocked as "Dave" and was voted on by only a few, many of which are not taking any active role in participating. As the numbers of devotes increase there may come up with a general consensus, actually I care little what the group is called, hence another reason for the mocking "Dave". Andy Y threw the ball into the RMWeb arena, if you go back to the original discussion you will see there were very few really credible participants. I'm not saying "credible" excludes the participants who were anti the BritOOMod concept or who contributed to the discussion from the Fre(e)mo camps. Just credible in the sense they appeared to want to join in. Even that is only a starting point as I said earlier the concept has been proven it now need more advocates, sponsors, wider participation. I do not see us getting that from just the tiny SECAG group or this discussion in a somewhat isolated area in the forum. I don't know if Andy Y has completely lost interest or even if he is just standing on the side-lines watching it all ferment. But the lack of participation could easily be understood by those reading as it is not getting any support from RMWeb and that it is just a bunch of cranks on here (most of whom can always be relied on to post too much) and who spend much of their time arguing about a lot but appear to do nothing. With only 6 of us participating in an event that was open to all does seem to support that theory.

If I get your drift those of us who participate need to rename it "Frank" ? It is a bit Catch 22 - those few who have made some small effort to get moving on this project sort of have the right to treat it as a bit of fun and gain some entertainment out of it - when we get taken seriously by numbers of others participating, perhaps then we will start to believe in it being a place for serious folk.

... and a small country in a big world but that never stopped us ...

That was what I was attempting to get at when I was suggesting a side show of an existing exhibition. It doesn't have to be with public access (though I still think there is scope for widening the audience beyond just RMWeb. It is things like this that just re-enforce my disbelief that the numbers of members of RMWeb suggested by the site statistics really do stack up in reality. The community of regular posters is very small by comparison and so the numbers of likely participants ends up being even smaller. The silence is all very disheartening, sad to say.

Fully agree. I know we were trailblazing but have been quite disappointed at the lack of involvement by other members and RMWeb in general. Also by this point I had hoped for more involvement and promotion to the cause (I do not mean financial) by sponsors and management. 40 participants seems more like dreamland now than it ever did! I was hoping for more like double that number UK-wide given the number of active modellers there out there, the easily compliant standards, and the relatively simple nature of building knocking-up a working module in relatively no time at all.

Been out of country for a couple of months and just picked up your email. Excellent! Count me in again. (I may even have done more work on the current module and even +1 other by then). Emphasis on the MAY the way my modelling time seems to have been stolen of late. The date is in the diary, clear at the moment, so could well stay that way. A one day pass is easier to obtain from management (especially as we are are still developing the group/concept). I would be interested in more events/venues but not up to the organisation involved (or at least the finding of suitable venue). The costs were very modest last time (given the entertainment value and success) so wouldn't mind if they were increased. The key thing would be anything that might help to increase participation. Is it the organisation of the event that is putting other RMWeb groups off? Or is the modular concept not flying because of actual lack of interest?

Furry dice anyone?http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vintage-Parts-14558-Green-Fuzzy/dp/B004M09LZE

"turning" ?? I think it did that a long time ago. never helped by false accusations and claim and counter claim. I know and expect you to advocate your product against every competitor and would hope that you think it is "the best" but let those who have used it speak up for you and let others voice their opinions on other products. It is a real shame the way this topic has evolved (the other one on static grass is going the same way). I would guess most of us want to see examples and compare them as best we can on the medium of flat screens, we certainly don't want to see this. I keep coming back in the increasingly vain hoe that the topic has settled down to a civil debate. Let your customers do the talking - if it really is that special they will let everyone know.

Good to see that these kits will survive. An important source of good kits for OO9. Look forward to individual annoucements in due course as things get up and running.

  Simplest method is right click on the post number (eg #1) on the right hand side of the post you wish to link to, select "copy link location" in the pop-up menu, then inside your text press {Ctrl}{V} "paste" keys together to insert the link url. (other, more complicated, methods available)

I'm not sure that you are really trying though. I am a potential customer. I am unable to access the most important part of your website. The products section. I thank you for removing that tracker I am sure many others are or will be as well. I believe my comment about appearance at shows is quite valid and applies to every supplier of scenic materials. I do understand you are a small business and that multiple shows are difficult to attend even more so given the distance. As a hobby we do rely on word of mouth and the internet forums. There has been many positives about your products put up here by your present customers. Of that I do take note. But you do appear to have taken over the topic (I'll admit I have done the same - though initially I was trying to get your website to function and to alert yourself and others to the tracker issue.) I still see nothing different between your applicator and the one I have. So I only see those remarks as anti-competitive and misleading. I still wish to sample your product. I just do not like the hard sell (from anyone) applied to a more broader topic on RMWeb. Responding to a specific request by a customer in one post is quite different from a series of posts with no one else posting in between. It is much more usual on RMWeb to start a new topic of your own. The one by LCUT is a good example. My last post on this topic - enough is enough - I'll pop by your site from time to time but ordering depends on it working. It is pretty obvious that it is to your current customers but you will never count the ones like me that cannot unless they care enough to let you know somehow. I'd suggest your web designer should learn his trade and before he insults your customers he appreciates what skills they may have and apologise to you and your customers for the introduction of the tracker and all the potential problems it brings.

Thanks, but thinking the process out a bit further, if he is not updating the website or "getting" emails than perhaps his Broadband isn't working either - so cannot browse RMWeb. Of course I would prefer to think that he is putting inn every spare hour trying to save his business investment ... but somehow ...