Silverstreak Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) Hi Giles, thanks for the feedback. There's no need to be sorry and we certainly do welcome the feedback. We're just as concerned with making sure the unquestionably iconic shape is faithfully reproduced. I'll certainly be looking further in to the points you have raised once I'm back in the office. Thanks again and have a great weekend. Cheers, Dave The rear shape of the double chimney and the slope down to the Smokebox should be in two stages. The Cad image of the model gives the impression its a single sloping drop to the smokebox. DJh got that right with both their A4 kits Finney not so for BR days Edited September 18, 2017 by Silverstreak Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boeing7572t6 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Can we please have a picture of the A4 from head on? This was the aspect of the model which caused most adverse comment and is the only view missing form the Cad images Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonmarshall Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Really interested in these new releases, particularly the coaches. Are there any actual photos yet or are we still only able to see CAD representations. It will be interesting to see how the teak effect is handled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hattons Dave Posted September 19, 2017 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted September 19, 2017 Hi all, Here's a view from the front of the 3D printed A4. As ever, we're keen to hear feedback to make sure that we get this right. Cheers, Dave 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giles Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) So far as I can tell from photographs, the front end should still taper in more. The 'nose' would appear to be about 70% of the width at the bottom compared to at smokebox level. I think the taper still has to be more.... note that at the bottom, the width of the nose is significantly less than the gauge to the bogie wheels. Note also that the lamp-irons directly above the buffers have more-or-less and equal amount of flat space on each side, whereas on your print, there is only a small gap before the nose rises Is the chimney wide enough? the full size one has a very meaningful one...! We'll get there! Edited September 19, 2017 by Giles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSB Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) It does appear from the above pictures that the taper should be slightly more although comparing it with the distance between the wheels is rather misleading as they are to finescale standards not Scaleseven! Edited September 19, 2017 by HSB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverstreak Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 So far as I can tell from photographs, the front end should still taper in more. The 'nose' would appear to be about 70% of the width at the bottom compared to at smokebox level. I think the taper still has to be more.... note that at the bottom, the width of the nose is significantly less than the gauge to the bogie wheels. Note also that the lamp-irons directly above the buffers have more-or-less and equal amount of flat space on each side, whereas on your print, there is only a small gap before the nose rises Is the chimney wide enough? the full size one has a very meaningful one...! We'll get there! That head on image of a real A4 is very telling, the models shape and chimney do not match Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Chimney too narrow , Footplate too wide and or Boiler too narrow . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giles Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) Another frontal for reference. Width over footplate is (I understand) 9ft, buffer centres 6' 8 1/2". Boiler barrel is 6' 5" plus cladding of course. 2017-09-19_09-56-09 by giles favell, on Flickr Edited September 19, 2017 by Giles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted September 19, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 19, 2017 Chimney too narrow , Footplate too wide and or Boiler too narrow . Boiler too narrow for me. The 4468 shot is possibly slightly deceptive as the valances are full whereas the model is the cut away version, but the footplate doesn't look too wide to me whereas the boiler width at its widest should be about in line with the buffer centers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osgood Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) With a shape as complex as this, I think it would take an image shot from pretty much the exact same angle to allow an accurate assessment of any differences. Giles' first shot (Shildon loco) is taken from a subtlety different viewpoint than that of the 3-D sample, which makes a big difference when comparing physical shape. Edited September 20, 2017 by Osgood Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giles Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) Trying to give more helpful data, the vertical line of double fixings would appear to be just in board of the main frames. This photo would seem to show the support to the plate work, mounted off a secondary frame. I don't know what the A4's distance between frames was, but many express locos were 4' 1 1/2" between frames Screenshot_20170920-093710 by giles favell, on Flickr Note also the very small buffer heads. 2017-09-20_09-42-30 by giles favell, on Flickr Edited September 20, 2017 by Giles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTrice Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 Does this help? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTrice Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 Another showing dimension over opening: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giles Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 THAT's what we needed!!!!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverstreak Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 THAT's what we needed!!!!!!!! Cant argue with that at all whether it will be altered, well we will just have to wait and see Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hattons Dave Posted September 22, 2017 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted September 22, 2017 Hi all, In the interest of making it easier to follow a specific project and provide feedback, I've separated the threads for each of our O Gauge projects. This thread will remain in place for updates and discussion around the LNER Class A3 4-6-2. If you're looking for the LNER Class A4 4-6-2 click HERE. If you're looking for the LNER Gresley Teak Coaches click HERE. Cheers, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hattons Dave Posted January 12, 2018 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 12, 2018 Our Class A3 and A4 in O gauge are a pair of complex projects - each locomotive having many details which are fairly unique to the class. This has presented us with several challenges during the CAD development stages and meant it has taken slightly longer than planned to get to the tooling stage. Both models are now in the tool room, metal is being cut and shaped and in the process of being completed. On such complex and large models this will take a while and we have outlined some updated dates for the project. 1st Samples - Mid March 2018 2nd Samples - Early July 2018 Decorated samples - Early August 2018 Production Samples - Mid September 2018 Delivery - Mid February 2019 Following comments made about other O gauge items with gear problems, we have discussed the use of differing materials for the main drive gears The material choice will affect multiple factors and the best decision will be made by testing different solutions. The motor has been designed to have less stress on the gears due to its orientation in the drive train. We will also be testing different materials for the gears - both delrin and brass. Both have pros and cons but we will be open with our results and let you see which was chosen and the metrics we have used to test them. If you have any questions or comments then please, either post them here, or contact us on info@hattons.co.uk and we will be happy to hear them. Cheers, Dave 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simond Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 (edited) Dave, I’d like to congratulate you & the team on your open and proactive approach to the issue - I’ve copied the link to the G0G forum. Best Simon Edited January 12, 2018 by Simond Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffP Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 And I would like to second that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 31, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just a thought, this has only just occurred to me, but what if people want to rename/renumber locos is there a way that the nameplates can be removed? May be a stupid question, but thought I’d ask! Rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hattons Dave Posted January 31, 2018 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just a thought, this has only just occurred to me, but what if people want to rename/renumber locos is there a way that the nameplates can be removed? May be a stupid question, but thought I’d ask! Rich The plates will be fixed on with a small amount of glue at the factory. They will easily be removed with careful use of a scalpel blade. It's useful to note that the nameplates on the A3s were all the same size which will be helpful when renaming locos. I hope this helps. Cheers, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hattons Dave Posted May 4, 2018 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted May 4, 2018 Afternoon all, We have now received the first engineering prototype for the Class A3 and we're sure you'll agree that it looks absolutely stunning. The A3 is shaping up very nicely and we're very happy with how the model is looking so far. Once our checks are complete, the project will progress onto the livery sample stage. The first EP for the Class A4 should be with us before too long as well. I've included a few images for your perusal below. Please feel free to give us your feedback and thoughts on the progress so far. All versions of the A3 are still available to pre-order on THIS page of our website. Cheers, Dave 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
two tone green Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 Stunning. Thanks for showing us Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianCAD Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 I'm not familiar with the prototype, but a few small details that the talented toolmakers might be able to tinker with: Remove rounded top edge to driving wheel splashers? Expansion Link looks a bit 2-dimensional. Heavy rims to moulded portion of front bogie wheels and perfunctory appearance of spokes within. Has there been any change to the drive mechanism since the initial CAD presentation? -Brian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now