NRM versus mainkline Deltic...

When the Bachmann Deltic was first released I complained (here) that the nose didn't look right, that it lacked the "massiveness" of the real thing or even the Lima variant. Bachmann and their cronies countered with comparisons to the manufacturer's drawings, claiming it to be correct.

According to the latest edition of Bachmann's own club magazine, manufacturers drawings weren't available for the prototype so they had to do a laser scan of the entire body. Guess what? Even ignoring the headlamp casing, the sheer "massiveness"of the nose end is now back!

If the new Deltic is right then the old Deltic must be wrong. Hopefully, they'll do laser scans of all bodies in future instead of relying on someone's interpretation of manufacturer's drawings?

(kim)

Reply to
kim
Loading thread data ...

"kim" wrote

How can you compare the original Bachmann 'Deltic' to the Lima model? The latter was an absolute abortion and the nose end was completely wrong. The Lima model wasn't even a consistent scale throughout.

John.

Reply to
John Turner

I find it unbelievable that that model manufacturers still rely so much on manufacturers drawings to get the shape of their models. Anyone who has worked in manufacturing knows that items aren't always built exactly the way they are on the drawings.

Fred X

Reply to
Fred X

Plus being exact scale doesn't always look right - persepective I suppose. None of the 00 Class 47's "feel right" somehow to me.

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

What if the model manufacturer measures the real thing, creates their own drawings, but the models aren't built exactly the way they are on the drawings?

PhilD

Reply to
PhilD

That's why I'd like to see Hornby do a new Class 47, not because the existing models are 'wrong', but to let the customer choose which looks best to him. The test moulding of the NRM Deltic though looks absolutely

*spot-on* (except for where the roofline meets the cab side windows, which I think is easily corrected).

It will be especially interesting to see the result when the next prototype is put through the scanner and compared with previous models.

(kim)

Reply to
kim

Highly unlikely as all the manufacturers use CAD/CAM to make their models.

Fred X

Reply to
Fred X

CAD/CAM works the same way whether the dimensional data comes from manufacturers drawings, measurement of the prototype or someone's imagination!

Regards, Greg.P. (Model designer taking a 5 minute break from CAD work)

Reply to
Greg Procter

I had a bit of a surf last night to try and spot what it is that make the 00 47's look not-quite-right-somehow, and also looked at my "native" 0 gauage ones too - which somehow also don't quite have that "presence" (strangely, 37's and 31's look ok!). I'm not sure if this is it, but one thing I did notice - and now I've seen it it sticks out like a sore thumb - is that all the body panels are *flat*. Memory, and again looking at "in-service" photos on line of blue era engines, shows all have slight rippling of the panels! I also noticed something else, confirmed by again looking at blue era photos, that some, at least, of the preserved blue era dieses have the wrong blue and yellow - thay have actualy made the "real-thing" look like the Hornby models! The Heljan 0 gauge

47 has the "right" blue/yellow combination, as in it looks right. As it happens I have a 1:18 Defender sitting on the shelf behind me, and a real one in the yard. The model looks just right in it's Nightfire Red, but put it against the real thing and it is much darker - but both *look* the same. Interesting...

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

What you notice with the car is 2 things, colour indoors is different to colour outdoors, and colour needs to be scaled as well, due to light and shadow effects etc.

One of the things I find with models is that you look down on them, but the beasts in real life you looked across at them or slightly up at them. Its very difficult to replicate.

Reply to
estarriol

I take your point, I took the model outside (and out of it's box) to make the comparison - the model was standing on the wing of the real thing (being micatallic paint, fading is not the issue it used to be). The model has definately been "corrected" - and very effectively too.

Agreed - but in my impromptu research I took that into account too and tried to compare like with like in terms of viewing angle (0 gauge snappers in particular seem to be pretty keen on "realistic" viewing angles). The best I could come up with in terms of lighting was a bright sunny day for real-world photos and "brightly" lit for models (I found photo's of this years G0G Telford show - the photo's had been messed about with so much (the dark, glowy light effect favoured by TV home design programmes) that I didn't even recognise the exhibition, despite being there! Why do they do that - it looked like a cross between a power failure and a Berni Inns publicity shot!

I'm half way through painting an Express Parcels van with Railmatch Rail Blue paint - it will be interesting to see how that turns out (now I've set myself thinking about it - dammit). In previous modelling endeavours some years back I used Humbrol (Railmatch etc weren't about then) and that seemed about right, but I've no idea how accurate a match that was.

Perhaps that's why light weathering looks good - they eye adds the imperfections it expects to see?

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

So you agree with what FredX said.

It's unlikely that a model made using CAD/CAM will be different to the drawings, regardless of the source of the drawings.

BUT, if the prototype manufacturer's drawings, used to provide dimiensional data for CAD/CAM, don't reflect what was built you get a model that matches the drawings but does not reflect the prototype that was built.

MBQ

Reply to
manatbandq

I think that is the issue with some factory perfect models, they just miss the expected 'look' somehow. As you say light weathering seems to blur this to a greater extent than the weathering applied would indicate.

Reply to
estarriol

I was making the point that CAD/CAM is irrelevant to the outcome - whatever source of information that is used to design the model will help determine the outcome. I'm sitting with drawings, photographs, measurements and memories of the prototype I'm modelling. They all disagree one way or another, but none of my sources has a complete set of data. =8^[ That leaves me interpreting! In addition the equipment, tools and materials I have available will affect the outcome. CAD/CAM affects the process of developing the model, but mostly in that I can make changes when I find major variations amongst my collected information.

That is a case of the model developer not doing enough homework before beginning the design process.

Greg.P. NZ

Reply to
Greg Procter

hello, you say bachmann dont have any drawings, i find that hard to believe, i myself have the drwaings for both the prototype and the production deltics, i have seen the bachmann and lima deltic and think the lima one was far betterm in fact im in the process of producing the perfect deltic as i can go by my drawings which are from english electric and vulcan foundry, all the deltic models so far made are all incorrect, i aim to remedy this with mine. thanks peter

formatting link

url:

formatting link

Reply to
peter smallwood

"peter smallwood" wrote

Really; I don't know how you come even close to making that decision. Tell me in what areas was the Lima model better?

John.

Reply to
John Turner

"John Turner" wrote

Hmm, didn't think I'd get an answer to that! :-(

John.

Reply to
John Turner

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.