5944

4 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

That kind of arrangement is the case on all the American steam stuff I've seen in N, where the coupling rods are just going along for the ride, but whether it scales up reliably to 4mm is a different issue.

It would probably have worked fine if there hadn't been so much slack and backlash between the gears. Yes there should be a little bit of give between them, but you shouldn't be able to turn one gear at the start of the gear train nearly half a turn before the wheels start to move. 

10 hours ago, 37114 said:

I am confused, I thought that this was restored by Salvage squad/ Ruston of this parish or is that a different one?

That was LR3090, which is a protected Simplex rather than an armoured one. Quite a few protected ones still around. 

Bit grubbier than the real 778 was today 

20 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

Putting my IP hat on for a moment...

 

There is, potentially, some value to registering CAD/CAM designs, but probably not as much as Dave thinks. It certainly won't prevent duplication. But it would prevent anyone else using his CAD for their own models.

 

To expand on that a bit, the concept of design in a physical, 3D object has no sense of "scale". It's purely the distinctiveness of the shape. Just like a photo is , legally, the same photo whether it's the size of a postage stamp or printed on a billboard, a design is the same design whether it's in 4mm scale, 2mm scale or twelve inches to the foot. That fact is relied on by creators of full-size designs to prevent people ripping them off. You cannot, for example, sell a model of the Angel of the North without the permission of Anthony Gormley, since he owns the design. The fact that your model is smaller than the real thing doesn't change that.

 

As far as railway models are concerned, the design right in a loco or wagon belongs to the original designer of the real thing. But that only applies as long as the design right exists. It doesn't apply once that right has expired. So, for example, Hornby, Bachmann, et al need the permission of the manufacturer to release a model of the IET, as that's a recent design, but not to release a model of a Jinty, as the IP in that will have expired long ago.

 

In the case of a model, though, the design of a model will be slightly different to the original. And those differences are subject to new design right. So Hornby can't just take a Bachmann model of a Jinty, scan it and create a replica, they have to start from scratch with their own design work.

 

That's where Dave's registrations will help. If he has had problems with clients commissioning him to produce a model, then taking the CAD/CAM files he's done for that and then going direct to the factory with those designs in order to cut out the middle man - then they can't do that any more. (Well, technically, they couldn't do it before, but it's a lot easier to prove infringement if the design is registered). If Dave does some work on his computer (or pays someone else to do the work) in order to create a set of CAD/CAM files necessary to create the tooling for a new model, then only DJM can use those files to create the tools.

 

So there is some value to what Dave has done. I presume the reason the major manufacturers haven't bothered with registering designs is because they, typically, don't do commissions in the same way (or don't rely on them to the same extent), so they're in far less danger of being ripped off by clients than DJM is (and, possibly, they're in a position to be much more picky about their clients). But, for a small manufacturer, I can see the benefit in registering designs so that a client who commissions them is then locked in to that manufacturer all the way through to production - unless they're willing to go all the way back to the drawing board (literally)  in order to switch supplier.

 

This won't prevent duplication, of the Hornby/Rails Terrier variety, or even the Olivia's Trains/Bachmann Blue Pullman variety, as in those cases both manufacturers started from the beginning with their own CAD/CAM files. It won't stop big manufacturers (or, for that matter, small ones) stepping onto a rival's turf or releasing a spoiler (again, a la the Hornby Class 66). Those are completely different issues, and there's no way to prevent that with design registration.

 

So Dave is, I think, misunderstanding the effects of registration when he suggests that it may prevent duplication. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea per se. It just remains to be seen whether it's as useful in practice as he hopes.

Is DJ going to get any more clients wishing to use him for their CAD work? 

RMB 1880 en route from ELR to NYMR. 

On 10/04/2019 at 13:44, Baby Deltic said:

The 56's were a bit of a maintenance nuisance. 

Plus the Romanian build quality was 'interesting'. "Individually handcrafted" was how someone within the Class 56 Group described them to me! 

On 25/03/2019 at 14:53, Ohmisterporter said:

 

Well worth a visit to East Kirkby Lincolnshire Aviation Heritage Centre. Quite impressive watching and hearing all four engines start up and the taxying runs.

Quite impressive smell as well, if it's a warm day and the wind is in the right direction - the chicken farm next door can get very ripe! I've been a couple of times. First time wasn't too bad, the second time was when the two Lancasters flew over. The smell hit you as soon as you opened the car door! 

3 hours ago, pH said:

 

I grew up in a street where the name of the street was spelled differently on the signs at the two ends of the street, and that was still the case when I was last there a few years ago. 

The next road to where I live is Whitehicks on the signs on the west side of the road, and White Hicks on the east side. The road runs north-south, so each end of the road has a different sign on each side. 

District line steam tickets on sale on Wednesday. 

 

https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/whats-on/events-calendar/heritage-vehicles-outings?sc_src=email_5076036&sc_lid=248191662&sc_uid=aIKZbFt958&sc_llid=72819&sc_eh=0150f80ee66805b41

 

Anyone got a spare kidney for sale? 

No need for yellow panels if the headlights and marker lights conform to the latest standards. Your retinas will be burnt if you look at the lights, so you wouldn't be able to see the yellow panel anyway! 

 

First pair 717s into service on the GN next Monday, meaning four 313s can come out of traffic.

13 hours ago, woodenhead said:

It's a catch 22 situation, people will be more inclined to pay up if they were more assured a model may be completed but in order to get a completed model you need people to pay up.

 

I was reading the class 17 thread earlier and it seemed it had the numbers when it was pulled by Dave, there has never really been a proper explanation and that probably spooked a lot of people.

Exactly. I'd like a King, and a 63xx, but his N gauge output isn't exactly stellar. One wagon, admittedly very good, which hasn't had a rerun. A Shark which to all intents and purposes is ready to be manufactured but hasn't. A Class 17 that was almost there before getting pulled. Expressions of interest for a few other items, and no information whatsoever about others. None of it really inspires confidence. 

 

I know a lot of his work has been commissions for other companies, but an N gauge wagon and two OO gauge locos doesn't seem a lot to show for a company that's been in existence for nearly 6 years. 

14 hours ago, Broadway Clive said:

Why is that?  It sounds like a rather a bigoted remark unless you can explain your reservations and offer an alternative explanation as to why the SR alone chose a bigger diameter wheel for their EE shunters. Lets debate stuff properly with some references we can all look up and comment on.

Not bigoted at all. You only have to look through some of his work to realise it's riddled with inaccuracies. Such as stating the D600 Warships would've become Class 41 under TOPS. How could they, when they were withdrawn before TOPS was implemented? Or that the early AC electric locos had two pantographs, one for 25kV, the other for 6.25kV. Again, wrong, they were both connected to the same transformer. There are others if you wish to look. He takes some nice photos, but any text has to be taken with a pinch of salt. 

13 hours ago, Broadway Clive said:

Quote from The Diesel Shunter (Marsden) P 28.  re 15201-3 Ashford built shunters:- '..........followed the previous LMS designs except that it was slightly heavier (4 tons) and had larger diameter driving wheels - 4ft 6'' compared to 4ft 0.5'' of the LMS design. These larger diameter wheels were stipulated as the locomotives were destined to operate over the third rail and the extra diameter gave the necessary clearance.' It also goes on about the need for a higher speed (30 MPH) to do trip work amongst passenger trains, which tallies with the reason given earlier for 20 MPH 08s not being suitable for trip working over LT.

Not sure I'd completely trust something technical written by Colin Marsden. 

Stevenage and District club are open a couple of days a week, 10.00 - 13.00, as well as a couple of evenings. Having your own premises is handy. 

I'm guessing DJ has done the usual and asked people not to share the email until he gets round to putting it on his website?

GWR HST set should move north on Tuesday, via Midland mainline.

https://flic.kr/p/bnZvk3

 

Not the clearest sadly, and no idea of you can get hold of a better copy from the LT Museum. I'm sure I've got a copy of a drawing somewhere, as I like you, I'm planning an E class in N gauge. It'll be locked away in the shed if I have got it though! I remember buying an old Railway Modeller from Ebay for Met loco drawing, but I have a feeling that was for another loco.

I've seen a photo somewhere, probably on another Italian site, of a Southern Railway 12T box van in Italy, complete with air brakes. No idea where I saw it though, or the location in Italy.

Completed the Eryrthromycin course Wednesday 3 a.m. (4 a day at 6 hour intervals, not very convenient drug industry, try harder in future.)

 

Gaseous emissions restored to boring normality by this morning. Feeling a little deflated...

Exactly the same as the course I've just finished. The 6 hour intervals were fine when I was working nights. 7am, 1pm, 7pm, 1am. Though mine seemed to have the opposite effect, an almost complete lack of flatulence for the last week. Most disappointing!

Arrived in the post this lunchtime. Had a quick flick through - Flaxby looks good. I liked the Z article too. I wondered where the 8F I'd sold on Ebay was going to end up!

I'm no rivet counter but...

The rivets are big enough to count! Yes, the real this is covered in them, but they're barely visible normally. The ones on the Dapol model look big enough to hold a battleship together.

It's the remains of an very elderly Graham Farish J69.

Well that is two different locos, and what has happened to the front end of 50007?

It didn't look like that last September.....

 

Dave

New metal welded in to the front end I believe. The dodgy yellow is tape!

Found this photo on Facebook, showing a slight incident with 99 7237-3 on Monday near Steinerne Renne. Have Heljan started making HSB locos?!

Then there are the problems of storing it on the train, 1/3rd of the front coach and 1/3rd of the rear used for fuel storage doesnt leave much passenger accommodation on a 3 coach train.

 

It might be a good idea in principle but lets see some details.

Don't forget a third of one coach will be taken up by an enormous disabled toilet and a couple of seats. If the seats are replaced as well, I doubt 3+2 seating will be refitted, so it wouldn't surprise me if a three car unit ends up with fewer seats than a two car unit. It'll be fun to watch DafT try and put a positive spin on that!