A couple of 42's

 
  robertc Chief Train Controller

I have just finished my 42 class project. Well, a couple of thing still need to be done, such as the front airhorns but they will be done soon.
They are 7mm scale-ish as they used an Atlas F9 as the basis of the body.
Ted Freemans decals once again make them look better.







cheers
Bob

Sponsored advertisement

  Shazam75 Chief Commissioner

very nice Bob - looks a treat!

Regards
Shelton
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
very nice Bob - looks a treat!

Regards
Shelton
Shazam75
I agree a great set of modells, looking and operating good.  They look great on that curve !


Regards,
David Head
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking
My eyes must have been deceiving me, for I swear I saw another 10 or so posts ahead of the last one when I looked at this thread a day ago.

You modellers are 'different'.

Laughing
  M636C Minister for Railways

It is unfortunate that only posts praising the models were left after a number of posts that pointed out minor shortcomings in the models, quite apart from the question of scale and the  relative size of decals, were removed.

One problem relating to the use of the Atlas/Roco body was that the model used the later punched one piece stainless steel grilles (or a plastic representation of them) while all Australian A7/A16 locomotives used the earlier fabricated stainless grilles (from the same manufacturer) which consisted of horizontal rods, while the punched grilles had three rows of vertical slots. Even the last few GM class, built many years after the last F unit had the old grilles. Somehow, GM10, which was built with mesh grilles, has ended up with the horizontal bar grilles in privatised operation.

This might be best addressed by painting the horizontal bars moulded into the F 9 grilles to emphasise that aspect. I think the NSW grilles were painted chrome yellow, but will take advice on that.

Peter
  ajbrown Junior Train Controller

Bob C. .......  I've lost your email address.
                   Please contact me ASAP on mine (if you've still got it).

Cheers,
Allan Brown
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
It is unfortunate that only posts praising the models were left after a number of posts that pointed out minor shortcomings in the models, quite apart from the question of scale and the  relative size of decals, were removed.

Peter
M636C
For those who are not looking here is a link to that thread.

https://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11396949.htm

It seems people also cannot help but judge other people's work and not accept their effort for what they are. Sorry Bob !
  ajbrown Junior Train Controller

Criticism is the sure fire way of turning a modeller off, especially if those doing the criticism don't have the ability or desire to model themselves.      Allan Brown
  M636C Minister for Railways

Criticism is the sure fire way of turning a modeller off, especially if those doing the criticism don't have the ability or desire to model themselves.      Allan Brown
ajbrown
But without constructive criticism, how can a modeller improve his work, as we all wish to do?

Without raising the topic again, the main concern expressed on the forum was regarding the oval nose logo.

Since this was a supplied decal, the problem was not due to the modeller but the maker of the decal.

In the other thread, it was determined that the real logo was 5/8 the width of the nose door.

The decal used on the model was wider than the nose door, not possible in real life.

The problem is not with the modeller but simply his sources of data being incorrect.

Otherwise we are all impressed by the model, noting the difficulties of different scales.

Peter
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Did the modeller ask for all this or just wanted to show off his model ? Was he personally happy with what he had made ? did he pronounce it a fully scale and accurate model ? Did he ask  what others thought wrong?  I  wonder ?

David Head
  M636C Minister for Railways

Did the modeller ask for all this or just wanted to show off his model ? Was he personally happy with what he had made ? did he pronounce it a fully scale and accurate model ? Did he ask  what others thought wrong?  I  wonder ?

David Head
dthead
If he hadn't wanted any comments, he wouldn't have posted the photographs.

None of the comments on the model were intended to do other than provide information.

Sadly, the separated thread was locked before the maker of the decals (who had posted) was able to comment on their size.

Peter
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Did the modeller ask for all this or just wanted to show off his model ? Was he personally happy with what he had made ? did he pronounce it a fully scale and accurate model ? Did he ask  what others thought wrong?  I  wonder ?

David Head
dthead
The answer is no but if he really wanted to show us his handiwork which was excellent by the way then he should accept fair criticism of something that was obviously wrong. We were not pointing out faults per se just pointing out that a slip up had been made in both the position and size of the plate. Any modeller putting his models on display is asking to have someone criticise something on it, just that some take the criticism the wrong way or read it differently. Nothing is perfect and models are one such place that criticism's should be welcome. No one said the models were bad or something just like M636 said someone's research was a bit off that is all. To me people that come up and say your model of XYZ locomotive has a fault I can see, then I ask them what and then have another look at the model and most probably they are right.

Years back a fellow modeller told me finish a model completely and then take a photo of it and you will see faults you never even thought of and it is true as well. The camera is a hard judge of things. Now with Mobile phones, tablets and digital camera's you can still do that but better you can see the photo straight away. You then only need to compare the model photo's to the prototype and see well something is amiss here so it should be corrected. I have lots of near enough models in my collection but I do try to get the paint and decalling as right as possible by doing a bit of research either from books, Magazines or the internet.

It just seems to me that in today's society we are not allowed to criticise any thing lest it upsets some poor soul. Now if those same photos were posted in the AMRM say and in the letters to the editor in the next edition someone said the same thing as what I did you have to accept that as fair criticism more so if it can be backed up with actual fact and others agree with it. If you don't want people to criticise models then simply please do not put up photographs of them. I liked the models and the time etc taking by the modeller to make them and they look right except for that one little thing!

I said if the modeller was pleased with them that was good enough, but from now on I will not offer to supply information about models or prototype if all that is going to happen is you get shot down for doing it. Imagine if we had not criticised some of the RTR manufacturer's for faults would you still accept an old Austrains model say as being a scale model, no these days they are considered near enough models. But they have moved on considerably detail wise because people found things to criticise on the models.

The only reasons I pointed it out in the first place was
(A) It looked wrong,

(B) I did not want the person going to a club or some like thing and someone said a lot worse about it,

(C) Tell him that some more research might have helped, before applying the decals in the first place.

I thoroughly agree on all points in M636's post though!
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Since the  owner of the 42's has walked away from here, I am locking it. I see no further use to argue for argument's sake, and people justifying their past comments, some time rather extensively defending  their point of view.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: ajbrown, Shazam75

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.