Austrains site updated

 
  wolfpac Minister for Railways

Location: Over here...
Even without using a fine tooth comb, I doubt if they were ever painted these colours. I think they would look better in black with red lining. Thats the first obvious.
"Piston"


I think you'll find that it's a 3D drawing of the model, so there's contrasting colours to show individual parts. Unless you knew that and were joking! Very Happy

Wolfpac

Sponsored advertisement

  a6et Minister for Railways


None of them were ever fitted with auto couplers!
"Roachie"


 

Sorry Bill but several of them were, especially those at Port Kembla when used for shunting the steel works area, & still in service in 1964 at least.

  5711 Assistant Commissioner

Re the 81 class... Still no samples seen... Just word that there around....
"5711"


Perhaps you should listen a bit more to the 'word that there (sic) around' rather than constantly expecting everything to be handed to you on a silver platter. Samples have been displayed at various exhibitions around the country during most if not all of 2012, various people have taken pictures of the samples and made them available for all to view via this forum.

Here's a running sample of the Austrains loco, purposely linked via a tiny pic with no give away details as to its source. You want the big high detail version? go find it yourself , there's plenty more out there Razz


image courtesy "Christian".
"Poath Junction"


Poath - I know you upload links and help us all with who is doing what etc etc - which we all appreciate - BUT sometimes images and samples are not that easy to find for people who do not and are not always searching every nook and cranny . The standard by all manufacturers these days is to educate those who have put $$$ down to see their product. Not that hard. These images on a website by the manufacturer is just plain logical sense.... nothing more nothing less.
Those pics of the G/BL sample is the first I've seen...I've been to exhibitions, searched websites etc etc and seen nothing until that was posted. I do look for myself - seen all the 46/Tangara/82's etc that are announced, samples whatever....
The Austrains 81/G/BL has not been so easy to find.....

Do I expect everything on a silver platter - not really - just a little better communication from Austrains re the sample of their model. I pay $$$ for their product - whats the harm in popping the sample on the website and not having to scroll thru image hosting sites yada yada...thats illogical.

If Auscision can do it - why not Austrains.
I fail to see why you need to be so judgemental regarding this - not everyone scrolls model rail websites hourly.
  catchpoint Assistant Commissioner

Location: At the end of a loop

None of them were ever fitted with auto couplers!
"Roachie"


 

Sorry Bill but several of them were, especially those at Port Kembla when used for shunting the steel works area, & still in service in 1964 at least.
"a6et"


FO's were not fitted with auto couplers either, but there were no complaints on that front.....

Hands up how many people are modelling Port Kembla?

Regards,

Catchpoint






  a6et Minister for Railways


None of them were ever fitted with auto couplers!
"Roachie"


 

Sorry Bill but several of them were, especially those at Port Kembla when used for shunting the steel works area, & still in service in 1964 at least.
"a6et"


FO's were not fitted with auto couplers either, but there were no complaints on that front.....

Hands up how many people are modelling Port Kembla?

Regards,

Catchpoint


"catchpoint"


 

Its not a matter of where they were located but the simple fact that some 20cl did have auto couplers. 

As for the aspect of where they were located, & hands up those who model Port Kembla, how many modellers all model the same area, era etc anyway, & that applies to each state.

The same thing with models, be they loco's or R/S that never had auto's on them, yet modellers really have no choice but to have them for functionality, unless they go down another expensive & time consuming path of trying to fit working hook & link couplers to their models.

In this case, as there were several 20cl with auto's fitted, the oportunity is there to have a model of them that actually did have them fitted.

Same thin with the 36cl there were 7 odd tenders fitted to various numbered pigs in their careers that also had autos fitted to the tender.

  AJAX Station Master


None of them were ever fitted with auto couplers!
"Roachie"


 

Sorry Bill but several of them were, especially those at Port Kembla when used for shunting the steel works area, & still in service in 1964 at least.
"a6et"


FO's were not fitted with auto couplers either, but there were no complaints on that front.....

Hands up how many people are modelling Port Kembla?

Regards,

Catchpoint


"catchpoint"


 

The same thing with models, be they loco's or R/S that never had auto's on them, yet modellers really have no choice but to have them for functionality, unless they go down another expensive & time consuming path of trying to fit working hook & link couplers to their models.

"a6et"


It's a loose term this "modelling" isn't it.  Its more a representation really, after all, most of us run trains not sit them on display shelves.

I think the line between modelling and playing trains is a little BLURRED here on RP.  IMO a model should be accurate from the TRACKBED up but that just isn't possible for the average "modeller".

I find it amusing when people comment on detail items being expensive, a 20 class is $495 but $4.10 for hook and link is dear.

Once your 20 class has done 100 trips around your oval wouldn't it be nice to detail it up to run like it really did, chugging up the grade on kenny hill. What a nice scene to "model", or would that be too time consuming.

I have since had a chat with JE regarding wheels and although he is not sure about what it will be yet RP25/110 (thanks Blacksmith) is the most likely...sigh. When I asked why, the answer was so the the toy chuff chuff modellers trains don't fall off and pester the smeg out of him about it. Ok not his exact words.  But if your trackwork is so poor maybe spending time on doing it better would be an option rather then expect manufacturers to cover all bases with a "code" 100. That would be RP25/100 just to clarify. Again, probably too time consuming.

I guess this hobby will always be regarded as toy hobby and I will have to continue with the ridicule from outsiders because those in the hobby keep holding it back from being amazing.

Ajax


  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner






Can someone who knows please go over this image with a fine-tooth comb, make a list of the errors and send that back to JE at Austrains?

That way perhaps we can avoid all the angst over various errors that comes out with each new model.

Sweet, thanks in advance,


Toby
"DQ2004"



Without going over dimensioned drawings a proper check cannot be made however there is an obvious visual error is the locomotive frames. They do not follow the prototype shape, instead they are a typical toy train solid block. Aft of the inside cylinders slide bars and non working valve gear could be included if close to prototype shape frames were modeled .

The reason why the current design uses a solid looking block is the designers have decided using an all driving wheel gear drive. They incorrectly believe it is better than side rod driven models. By doing this you cannot make the correct shaped frame. The fact is the extra gears are driving nothing due to the clearances between the gear teeth which add up to be more than the clearances in the side rods. The side rods are still doing all the work of transmitting the power from the driven wheel to the rest. Noting this fact the model will run smoother if separate side rods are used for each wheel compared to the single one per side if the drive is from the rear axle. This then allows the centre axle to be sprung. This results in better electrical pick up, important for a small shunting locomotive. This has been done on a number of RTR mass produced UK 00 scale 0-6-0's with success. Pickups on the trucks then are unnecessary if a sprung centre axle is used. It looks like the leading and trailing truck wheels do not have stainless steel treads but are just die cast. Die cast wheels eventually become dirt magnets and don't look as good as stainless steel tires.


The above advice will result in a the model that runs reliably at low speed and look much better at no extra cost.  For $495, I expect to see a prototypical mainframe, not a typical toy train frame.

On a 19 class model the mainframe issue becomes more obvious, particularly looking at what should be open space forward and aft of the cylinders.



Terry Flynn.






  catchpoint Assistant Commissioner

Location: At the end of a loop





Can someone who knows please go over this image with a fine-tooth comb, make a list of the errors and send that back to JE at Austrains?

That way perhaps we can avoid all the angst over various errors that comes out with each new model.

Sweet, thanks in advance,


Toby
"DQ2004"



Without going over dimensioned drawings a proper check cannot be made however there is an obvious visual error is the locomotive frames. They do not follow the prototype shape, instead they are a typical toy train solid block. Aft of the inside cylinders slide bars and non working valve gear could be included if close to prototype shape frames were modeled .

The reason why the current design uses a solid looking block is the designers have decided using an all driving wheel gear drive. They incorrectly believe it is better than side rod driven models. By doing this you cannot make the correct shaped frame. The fact is the extra gears are driving nothing due to the clearances between the gear teeth which add up to be more than the clearances in the side rods. The side rods are still doing all the work of transmitting the power from the driven wheel to the rest. Noting this fact the model will run smoother if separate side rods are used for each wheel compared to the single one per side if the drive is from the rear axle. This then allows the centre axle to be sprung. This results in better electrical pick up, important for a small shunting locomotive. This has been done on a number of RTR mass produced UK 00 scale 0-6-0's with success. Pickups on the trucks then are unnecessary if a sprung centre axle is used. It looks like the leading and trailing truck wheels do not have stainless steel treads but are just die cast. Die cast wheels eventually become dirt magnets and don't look as good as stainless steel tires.


The above advice will result in a the model that runs reliably at low speed and look much better at no extra cost. For $495, I expect to see a prototypical mainframe, not a typical toy train frame.

On a 19 class model the mainframe issue becomes more obvious, particularly looking at what should be open space forward and aft of the cylinders.



Terry Flynn.





"NSWGR1855"


Willing to stand corrected but isn't another model importer using all driving wheel gear drive on their forthcoming NSW standard goods locos.

Regards,

Catchpoint
  catchpoint Assistant Commissioner

Location: At the end of a loop
Perhaps hook couplers could be sent out after the model is delivered to those who are not modelling Port Kembla, much like decals for passenger cars
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork

Without going over dimensioned drawings a proper check cannot be made however there is an obvious visual error is the locomotive frames. They do not follow the prototype shape, instead they are a typical toy train solid block. Aft of the inside cylinders slide bars and non working valve gear could be included if close to prototype shape frames were modeled .

The reason why the current design uses a solid looking block is the designers have decided using an all driving wheel gear drive. They incorrectly believe it is better than side rod driven models. By doing this you cannot make the correct shaped frame. The fact is the extra gears are driving nothing due to the clearances between the gear teeth which add up to be more than the clearances in the side rods. The side rods are still doing all the work of transmitting the power from the driven wheel to the rest. Noting this fact the model will run smoother if separate side rods are used for each wheel compared to the single one per side if the drive is from the rear axle. This then allows the centre axle to be sprung. This results in better electrical pick up, important for a small shunting locomotive. This has been done on a number of RTR mass produced UK 00 scale 0-6-0's with success. Pickups on the trucks then are unnecessary if a sprung centre axle is used. It looks like the leading and trailing truck wheels do not have stainless steel treads but are just die cast. Die cast wheels eventually become dirt magnets and don't look as good as stainless steel tires.


The above advice will result in a the model that runs reliably at low speed and look much better at no extra cost. For $495, I expect to see a prototypical mainframe, not a typical toy train frame.

On a 19 class model the mainframe issue becomes more obvious, particularly looking at what should be open space forward and aft of the cylinders.

Terry Flynn.
"NSWGR1855"


You deduced all that from a cra*ppy jpeg image, wow!
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner






Can someone who knows please go over this image with a fine-tooth comb, make a list of the errors and send that back to JE at Austrains?

That way perhaps we can avoid all the angst over various errors that comes out with each new model.

Sweet, thanks in advance,


Toby
"DQ2004"



Without going over dimensioned drawings a proper check cannot be made however there is an obvious visual error is the locomotive frames. They do not follow the prototype shape, instead they are a typical toy train solid block. Aft of the inside cylinders slide bars and non working valve gear could be included if close to prototype shape frames were modeled .

The reason why the current design uses a solid looking block is the designers have decided using an all driving wheel gear drive. They incorrectly believe it is better than side rod driven models. By doing this you cannot make the correct shaped frame. The fact is the extra gears are driving nothing due to the clearances between the gear teeth which add up to be more than the clearances in the side rods. The side rods are still doing all the work of transmitting the power from the driven wheel to the rest. Noting this fact the model will run smoother if separate side rods are used for each wheel compared to the single one per side if the drive is from the rear axle. This then allows the centre axle to be sprung. This results in better electrical pick up, important for a small shunting locomotive. This has been done on a number of RTR mass produced UK 00 scale 0-6-0's with success. Pickups on the trucks then are unnecessary if a sprung centre axle is used. It looks like the leading and trailing truck wheels do not have stainless steel treads but are just die cast. Die cast wheels eventually become dirt magnets and don't look as good as stainless steel tires.


The above advice will result in a the model that runs reliably at low speed and look much better at no extra cost. For $495, I expect to see a prototypical mainframe, not a typical toy train frame.

On a 19 class model the mainframe issue becomes more obvious, particularly looking at what should be open space forward and aft of the cylinders.



Terry Flynn.





"NSWGR1855"


Willing to stand corrected but isn't another model importer using all driving wheel gear drive on their forthcoming NSW standard goods locos.

Regards,

Catchpoint
"catchpoint"


You are correct. Both models are comming out of the same factory. Fortinately the shape of the plate frames on the NSW 50 is not  compromised by the gears.


Terry Flynn
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner


Without going over dimensioned drawings a proper check cannot be made however there is an obvious visual error is the locomotive frames. They do not follow the prototype shape, instead they are a typical toy train solid block. Aft of the inside cylinders slide bars and non working valve gear could be included if close to prototype shape frames were modeled .

The reason why the current design uses a solid looking block is the designers have decided using an all driving wheel gear drive. They incorrectly believe it is better than side rod driven models. By doing this you cannot make the correct shaped frame. The fact is the extra gears are driving nothing due to the clearances between the gear teeth which add up to be more than the clearances in the side rods. The side rods are still doing all the work of transmitting the power from the driven wheel to the rest. Noting this fact the model will run smoother if separate side rods are used for each wheel compared to the single one per side if the drive is from the rear axle. This then allows the centre axle to be sprung. This results in better electrical pick up, important for a small shunting locomotive. This has been done on a number of RTR mass produced UK 00 scale 0-6-0's with success. Pickups on the trucks then are unnecessary if a sprung centre axle is used. It looks like the leading and trailing truck wheels do not have stainless steel treads but are just die cast. Die cast wheels eventually become dirt magnets and don't look as good as stainless steel tires.


The above advice will result in a the model that runs reliably at low speed and look much better at no extra cost. For $495, I expect to see a prototypical mainframe, not a typical toy train frame.

On a 19 class model the mainframe issue becomes more obvious, particularly looking at what should be open space forward and aft of the cylinders.

Terry Flynn.
"NSWGR1855"


You deduced all that from a cra*ppy jpeg image, wow!
"TheBlacksmith"


And the text on the web page about the gearing.

The rest is years of work experience looking at cad drawings and practical experience fine tuning my model  locomotives.

Terry Flynn.



  a6et Minister for Railways


Perhaps hook couplers could be sent out after the model is delivered to those who are not modelling Port Kembla, much like decals for passenger cars
"catchpoint"


 

well why not?  But don't forget to remove the auto types from the other models incorrectly fitted with them.

Likewise he says a former CME, who it seems shall remain nameless, what years did this CME hold the position as carriage works manager? & as I asked above, about the other carriages that had the tink & the DMU types?

  Captain Underpants Train Controller

Re the 81 class... Still no samples seen... Just word that there around....
"5711"


Perhaps you should listen a bit more to the 'word that there (sic) around' rather than constantly expecting everything to be handed to you on a silver platter. Samples have been displayed at various exhibitions around the country during most if not all of 2012, various people have taken pictures of the samples and made them available for all to view via this forum.

Here's a running sample of the Austrains loco, purposely linked via a tiny pic with no give away details as to its source. You want the big high detail version? go find it yourself , there's plenty more out there Razz


image courtesy "Christian".
"Poath Junction"
Poath - I know you upload links and help us all with who is doing what etc etc - which we all appreciate - BUT sometimes images and samples are not that easy to find for people who do not and are not always searching every nook and cranny . The standard by all manufacturers these days is to educate those who have put $$$ down to see their product. Not that hard. These images on a website by the manufacturer is just plain logical sense.... nothing more nothing less. Those pics of the G/BL sample is the first I've seen...I've been to exhibitions, searched websites etc etc and seen nothing until that was posted. I do look for myself - seen all the 46/Tangara/82's etc that are announced, samples whatever....The Austrains 81/G/BL has not been so easy to find.....Do I expect everything on a silver platter - not really - just a little better communication from Austrains re the sample of their model. I pay $$$ for their product - whats the harm in popping the sample on the website and not having to scroll thru image hosting sites yada yada...thats illogical. If Auscision can do it - why not Austrains.I fail to see why you need to be so judgemental regarding this - not everyone scrolls model rail websites hourly.
"5711"



Correct me if I'm wrong but maybe Austrains are keeping things low key about the 81 Class due to the fact that Powerline are doing a re-run of their 81 with all new mechs.
  allambi_mk2 Locomotive Fireman

Location: South Yarra, Victoria
Ok kids. I've been reading the comments re pics of the upcoming Austrains G. After googling some key words, I have come up with this link;

http://www.vr-enthusiast.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=727&p=12580

Thanks Poath - mystery solved Wink
  anzac1959 Chief Commissioner

Ok kids. I've been reading the comments re pics of the upcoming Austrains G. After googling some key words, I have come up with this link;

http://www.vr-enthusiast.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=727&p=12580

Thanks Poath - mystery solved Wink
"allambi_mk2"


I didnt know Independent Rail had 81s/G Wink
  Newcastle Express Chief Commissioner

You mean to say that the IRA owned an 81 class!!
  Nipper Junior Train Controller

Location: Port Pirie
Latest newsletter has been posted 10/1/13;
http://www.austrains.com.au/newsletters/NEWSLETTER_59_jan_2013_ver1.pdf

  DQ2004 Chief Commissioner

Location: Hobart -where the rain has lumps in it

Austrains website has been updated this afternoon with a new page featuring their about to be released Victorian Railways 'M' cattle vans.
These will be available at next weekend's (26-27 Jan) Corio Model Railway Club Exhibition.

Apparently SDS will have theirs there too, and SEM has just upgraded their kit of the same vehicle, which means that everyone will be able to walk away with dozens of M vans!
Rolling Eyes


http://www.austrains.com.au/vr_m_cattle.html

Regards all,

Toby

  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork



Austrains website has been updated this afternoon with a new page featuring their about to be released Victorian Railways 'M' cattle vans.
These will be available at next weekend's (26-27 Jan) Corio Model Railway Club Exhibition.

Apparently SDS will have theirs there too, and SEM has just upgraded their kit of the same vehicle, which means that everyone will be able to walk away with dozens of M vans!
Rolling Eyes


http://www.austrains.com.au/vr_m_cattle.html

Regards all,

Toby

"DQ2004"


And the current edition of AMRM news section mentions that the M wagons will be closely followed by the P Powder Van, HD and short T van. So there are 3 more SEM kits that were sent to the chinese by the 'research team'.

Even so, why do the P van? It only ran in Victoria and there were only 50 of them. Even SEM has only managed to sell a small number of them. Dumb choice.

  SteamtoStay Chief Commissioner

Location: Building floorplates

And the current edition of AMRM news section mentions that the M wagons will be closely followed by the P Powder Van, HD and short T van. So there are 3 more SEM kits that were sent to the chinese by the 'research team'.
"TheBlacksmith"

It was said a while back that most of the RTR producers get together occasionally and tell each other their planned projects to avoid conflicts (at least in theory). Assuming this still happens, are companies like SEM represented at these meetings?

After all, I'm getting worried that the flood of RTR stock duplicating SEM kits will eventually have a serious effect on the viability of companies like Steam Era. And a few years after that, the new generation of model railway enthusiasts won't have any idea how to actually 'model', nor any way of practicing without stuffing up something really expensive.

This is why I would choose to denounce a company if they produced a DERM or J Class steam locomotive; I feel that Steam Era's kits, while brilliant in their own right, also form an important part of the formative experiences of any new member of the hobby.

In fact, with this latest news the total count of 'simple' VR wagon kits only available from SEM is now reduced to just two, the UB and UP varieties. Nearly everything else in the plastic range is, or soon will be, available as RTR - and once taking into account the cost of couplers, paint and tools, the SDS and Austrains releases are only around $10 more expensive than the kits on a per-wagon basis.

That said, I have every intention of maintaining a loyal customer to SEM and their brilliant products. For the reasons above, I feel the company both deserves and needs our support, now more than ever.

Even so, why do the P van? It only ran in Victoria and there were only 50 of them. Even SEM has only managed to sell a small number of them. Dumb choice.
"TheBlacksmith"

Reason is probably the similar underframe. I wonder if the Austrains release will be a part of the Basix range? Further, they've done the M, T (short), HD (ex U) and P; SDS are doing the M and KQ. At what point is an IA going to be announced, and after that are there any other short-underframe wagons?

Re the P vans specifically, there appears to be some confusion; PJV lists anywhere from 45 (diagram) through 51 (list) to 54 (main page). So which is it?

  Hendo Deputy Commissioner





And the current edition of AMRM news section mentions that the M wagons will be closely followed by the P Powder Van, HD and short T van. So there are 3 more SEM kits that were sent to the chinese by the 'research team'.


Even so, why do the P van? It only ran in Victoria and there were only 50 of them. Even SEM has only managed to sell a small number of them. Dumb choice.
"TheBlacksmith"



It is inevitable that RTR versions will be made of most locomotives and rolling stock that may presently be made as kits or brass, that's business and progress. Possibly SEM could diversify and rescale his drawing and make new tooling for O and N scale, I am sure it would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Hendo

  SteamtoStay Chief Commissioner

Location: Building floorplates

It is inevitable that RTR versions will be made of most locomotives and rolling stock that may presently be made as kits or brass, that's business and progress. Possibly SEM could diversify and rescale his drawing and make new tooling for O and N scale, I am sure it would be appreciated.
"Hendo"

The problem with that is the huge cost involved, when considering that TheBlacksmith has posted in the past that the DERM kit took over ten years to break even. With a smaller market it would presumably take even longer. And there's always the risk of being chased by the RTR market.

Further, I suspect that the larger a scale one uses, the less practical it would be to construct the kit primarily with plastic. HO to N Scale might be possible (though N scale kits would be difficult at best).

  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork

It was said a while back that most of the RTR producers get together occasionally and tell each other their planned projects to avoid conflicts (at least in theory). Assuming this still happens, are companies like SEM represented at these meetings?

"SteamtoStay"


That's urban myth, it does not happen.

  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork



It is inevitable that RTR versions will be made of most locomotives and rolling stock that may presently be made as kits or brass, that's business and progress. Possibly SEM could diversify and rescale his drawing and make new tooling for O and N scale, I am sure it would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Hendo

"Hendo"


There is little to no market for injection moulded models of VR prototypes in either of those scales. Not going to happen.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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