Are Hornby's Designs and Details Too Clever?

[adb968008]

A 'not fit for purpose' judgement is very specific and very serious. A broken lamp iron, however disappointing it might be, does not make a model not fit for purpose. Indeed, I would be surprised if any postal or transit damage would make a model not fit for purpose. It would simply be classed as damaged or faulty goods and dealt with on that basis. 'Not fit for purpose' implies serious design or manufacturing faults which mean that the model does not do what it is intended to do (i.e. pull trains on a model railway). (CJL)

Value is defined in numerous industries, and legal publications as the sum combination of fitness for purpose AND fitness for use.

If either are out of balance some Value is lost.

 

Whilst the model train in this circumstance does what it says on the tin (fitness for purpose), it may fail to meet the test of fitness for use.

Why..

If bits are damaged / missing / broken, compared to those of its peers from the same SKU / Production line / batch then it has failed the quality test, even if it’s passed the operational test.

 

The easiest way to demonstrate if Value has been degraded is a peer review.. if it’s resale value is lower than one without the same implied issues, at the same time, location and conditions, then it’s failed.

 

In this case i would argue if the model is not visually demonstrable for acceptable use on a model railway layout with the impairments it has, without remedy it’s not usable, even if it’s purpose is achieved.

(Eg. would you be happy to run it on an exhibition layout as is, would it attract adverse comment, look out of place etc ?)

 

Who defines what the Value is ? Well that’s down to each individual to decide their acceptance level, however the standard of Value is benchmarked by the Manufacturer in the proposed quality and price attached to their item initially.

 

I’ve spent much of my career advising on the importance of fitness to use being equally as fitness for purpose, though much of this world focuses on purpose, when history shows the winners are usually those that do both... keep it simple and make sure it works.

Edited June 4, 2018 by adb968008

[Chuffed 1]

The same couriers and UK postal system used to handle similar Hornby models without significant damage, similarly detailed models, maybe the vibration in current aircraft holds or some other part of the handling chain is to blame for my recent bad run. Living in NZ I don't have much choice,  I cannot easily reach any shop. I can think of 4 retailers in NZ which sell Hornby, all at very high retail and only one within 400 kms.

 

The models which have been damaged are Hornby SWS Duchess R3555, poorly assembled, (not damaged by courier), Black 5 45000 smokebox darts off, smokebox lamp iron missing, A3 Minoru smokebox darts off,  and a few others like the DoG requiring repair to drawbar area, my point being that the percentage with faults has been more in the last three years than in the preceding 10 or so.

 

So maybe I have been unlucky, or maybe aeroplanes for 30+hours bring vibration into it, I don't know.

 

When I include two damaged Heljan 47XXs the percentage with faults is very high, but of course that is not a Hornby issue.

I am about to open a Heljan Tango O2 with trepidation!   Again not a Hornby issue.

 

In any event here is a pic of the repaired Duke, which isn't a bad model, and I think very good model for the price 2 yrs ago which was in the order of £100.

 

Img_1894a_r1200.jpg

 

I disagree about the second-hand models being just a new phenomenon, I think supply and demand are reaching a tipping point which will lower prices in a big way. Easy prediction make, I know, prophets of doom and all that.  

 

Regards

As an ex-RAF mover I often had to fly all over the world on cargo aircraft alongside freight and vehicles. You would not believe the amount of oscillation and vibration exhibited by an aircraft even on 'steady' and level flight. Vehicles in particular, would be constantly shimmying like a go-go dancer on acid, with the chains constantly relaxing and tautening  due to compression of the springs. Obviously these things are proportionate, but I would have thought a day and a half of constant shaking would loosen most fragile (and thereby sparingly attached) components.

I'll have a look to see if I've any footage of lashed vehicles in 'safe and level' flight - you'd get a good idea of the stresses involved even in a calm weather flight.

It just may be that Bachmann have factored this effect into their designs, and Hornby and Heljan haven't.

[robmcg]

As an ex-RAF mover I often had to fly all over the world on cargo aircraft alongside freight and vehicles. You would not believe the amount of oscillation and vibration exhibited by an aircraft even on 'steady' and level flight. Vehicles in particular, would be constantly shimmying like a go-go dancer on acid, with the chains constantly relaxing and tautening  due to compression of the springs. Obviously these things are proportionate, but I would have thought a day and a half of constant shaking would loosen most fragile (and thereby sparingly attached) components.

I'll have a look to see if I've any footage of lashed vehicles in 'safe and level' flight - you'd get a good idea of the stresses involved even in a calm weather flight.

It just may be that Bachmann have factored this effect into their designs, and Hornby and Heljan haven't.

 

Indeed the vibration and movement of everything in a cargo plane or ship can be quite alarming, I have experienced such in the vehicle deck of road-rail ferries here on 1960s-70s Cook Strait in NZ, with car suspensions 'bottoming' on the dips in a force 8-9 gale and 10 metre+ swells. We had ferries with crews who did not like to cancel things! They are more conservative these days. Everything was chained down of course back in the 70s  not so sure now. One hoped that the railway wagons were not going to break loose!

 

I have no reason to doubt what you say about aircraft holds, a good friend who is a very keen aircraft aficionado can tell stories of serious bumps and turbulence, and follows a couple of cargo pilots' blogs, some rather challenging landings at times!

 

My feeling is that the stowage of parcel mail on international flights may involve a bit of luck, and whether or not the engine inside its cradle in its box is vertical or horizontal.  

 

Thanks.

Edited June 4, 2018 by robmcg

[robmcg]

I wonder if part of the problem is the internal weight of a model shifting its mass to the plastic body when dropped.

 

You don’t hear much about wagons and coaches having issues.

 

Perhaps shipping with the body separate from the chassis inside the packaging may be safer ? (Proto 2000 did this in the early 2000s, I don’t recall damage to any of theirs). The box was slightly larger with the body above the chassis in the packaging and self attached by the purchaser.

 

I think this is true of Hejan's 47XX pony truck, and maybe the O2, not so sure about such as the Hornby Duchess SWS which had the body lug issue.

 

I don't think separate chassis and body delivery is the answer.  Rivarossi US and other US models are very heavy. The engines are often held in quite large boxes with foam around plastic shrouds, they don't get damaged by drop or vibration. It isn't rocket science, it just cost more. 

 

Placing the plastic shroud in a rectangular box inside a fairly stiff cardboard box is not enough for protection either from impact or vibration, but you can store more in a container, and the ones which suffer damage, well, most aren't returned if the damage is minor.  Accountants rule!

Edited June 4, 2018 by robmcg

[Roy Langridge]

Just because a box is intact but the loco inside is damaged is it certain that the postal service didn't cause the damage? A lot of modern locos are held very securely in their box - when dropped onto a surface the packaging is all contained by the outer wrapping / bubble wrap etc. the loco body stops almost instantly, the many details attached (often by friction alone these days) may well try to continue their journey to the centre of the earth unabated. The result? Lots of loose bits on an otherwise undamaged loco.

 

Having purchased many locos over the past few years and having had very few problems (2 returns in probably 150+ deliveries) I am left with the opinion that the postal service (where? who knows?) is probably to blame for some of the damage you describe.

 

Roy

Edited June 5, 2018 by Roy Langridge

[Chuffed 1]

Just because a box is intact but the loco inside is damaged is it certain that the postal service didn't cause the damage? A lot of modern locos are held very securely in their box - when dropped onto a surface the packaging is all contained by the outer wrapping / bubble wrap etc. the loco body stops almost instantly, the many details attached (often by friction alone these days) may well try to continue their journey to the centre of the earth unabated. The result? Lots of loose bits on an otherwise undamaged loco.

 

Having purchased many locos over the past few years and having had very few problems (2 returns in probably 150+ deliveries) I am left with the opinion that the postal service (where? who knows?) is probably to blame for some of the damage you describe.

 

Roy

Would be surprising if the postal service was to blame. I've had 50+ locos delivered over the last seven years and I'm struggling to think of one that was caused by transit damage, even when the packaging was obviously damaged. As it would appear that none of these packages has ever involved air freighting, and as Rob McG has had such a high level of returns, it's either flight vibration or a malicious postie.

 

I know where my money is, and it ain't the malicious postie!

[jjb1970]

Keep in mind these things are mainly delivered by sea, in shipping containers. Those boxes are subject to some pretty rough handling, ship motion and high shock loadings when loading/unloading. I buy a lot of my models from the US and despite them being rather fragile and detailed to an exceptionally high standard none of them have suffered any damage in transit. So I'm not sure Rob's run of bad luck can be blamed on airlines or the postal service (although neither can those things be discounted either).

[robmcg]

I'll go with airline freight vibration, as I don't think the couriers here or in the UK are generally neglectful.

 

My feeling also is that assembly in factories may not be perfect.

[Jeff Smith]

Sorry but I cannot buy aircraft vibration unless part of the route used old piston engined aircraft. Modern turbofan and even turboprop aircraft are generally quite smooth however clear air turbulence may be a factor.....

[Chuffed 1]

Sorry but I cannot buy aircraft vibration unless part of the route used old piston engined aircraft. Modern turbofan and even turboprop aircraft are generally quite smooth however clear air turbulence may be a factor.....

I can assure you that there's vibration in flight on modern aircraft too. I've flown alongside cargo on J model C130s (about 1,000 hours) and jet C17s (as well as other types) and vibration you wouldn't notice sat in a cramped seat on a passenger deck is quite evident on cargo floors, particularly on sprung loads and where a/c pallets are held on roller tracking.

If you were to shake most boxed model locos for a day and a half I'd pretty much expect to see something drop off!

[Jeff Smith]

Vibration is an interesting and complex topic. Components and equipment for aircraft have to undergo extensive testing to ensure functionality under vibration. Vibration consists of the amplitude, ie distance moved, and the frequency. There are also shock load tests, ie being dropped. A big factor in survivability of the item under test is the mass as this provides inertia. Aircraft equipment is either hard mounted or, in the case of electronic items may me mounted on anti-vibration feet. These are selected to match the mass of the unit. Road vehicles being transported on aircraft are still sitting on their own suspension which is designed for road use so may react somewhat differently in an aircraft hold.

 

Anyway back to models, I doubt that the individual packaging is tested but in any case if the model is well restrained within the box so that a shock load doesn't allow the model to move within the box then things like lamp irons which would have tiny inertia shouldn't break off. My guess would be handling damage during initial packaging or an intermediate re-packaging, if such a thing occurs.

[Chuffed 1]

Just to undermine my argument, on getting out my BR H class today, I remembered that the dome was loose when I received it, and inspection showed that the dome didn't seat properly and there was too little glue to hold it!

 

So Rob, you're probably right, certain manufacturers are making things too complicated/flimsy!

Edited June 7, 2018 by Chuffed 1

[Steamysandy]

I've said for years that all that was missing from the Hornby Top Grade A4 was the contents of the crews snap boxes!

[G-BOAF]

Just to undermine my argument, on getting out my BR H class today, I remembered that the dome was loose when I received it, and inspection showed that the dome didn't seat properly and there was too little glue to hold it!

 

So Rob, you're probably right, certain manufacturers are making things too complicated/flimsy!

 

As someone who has recently been turning Castles from RTR into kits and rebuilding with different detail variations, I'm glad of the sparing glue used! I'm using flimsy to my advantage!

[Mike Buckner]

I've abandoned buying anything new, and confine myself to running old, simple, stock. And occasionally looking at the forums. The reasons are that much modern rolling stock is too fiddly, and also simply not robust enough. If it falls apart before you even use it, it is not fit for purpose in my book. When I buy a car or washing machine or television, I do not expect to have to do significant work on the item in order for it to provide satisfaction. I regard model railways the same way - I am a user, not a purchaser of spare parts to be fettled/assembled.

[Steamport Southport]

Maybe they could have two ranges.

 

One for those that want super detailed models and another for those that want more robust models that are able to withstand heavy handling. Maybe they could call it Railroad or something.

 

 

 

 

 

Jason

[Jeff Smith]

I've abandoned buying anything new, and confine myself to running old, simple, stock. And occasionally looking at the forums. The reasons are that much modern rolling stock is too fiddly, and also simply not robust enough. If it falls apart before you even use it, it is not fit for purpose in my book.

A fair comment regarding damage prior to use, be it as received or unpacking handling damage. Also I can understand the concern about stock that is frequently handled, however with fidelity and prototype details some fragility is to be expected, unless it is all metal. Fiddle yards are designed to minimise stock handling. Kit built stock can be built with minimal fragile details or with as much detail as you like, but with that comes the possibility of inadvertent damage. Kit builders tend not to complain about fragility of a kit they've built they just handle it very gently......

 

I would liken handling practice to owning vinyl records, some people manage to keep and play them damage free for years, others manage to scratch them in no time at all.

[adb968008]

I've abandoned buying anything new, and confine myself to running old, simple, stock. And occasionally looking at the forums. The reasons are that much modern rolling stock is too fiddly, and also simply not robust enough. If it falls apart before you even use it, it is not fit for purpose in my book. When I buy a car or washing machine or television, I do not expect to have to do significant work on the item in order for it to provide satisfaction. I regard model railways the same way - I am a user, not a purchaser of spare parts to be fettled/assembled.

Not to nit pick, but I think you mean “not fit for use”... it is fit for purpose. But the deficiency of either reduces its overall value.

[sandwich station]

For years and years modellers and collectors have wanted more detail, more accurate models, year after year but now your saying they have gone to far and should produce models as they did years ago?

[Kiwi]

For years and years modellers and collectors have wanted more detail, more accurate models, year after year but now your saying they have gone to far and should produce models as they did years ago?

Good point. “be careful what you wish for”

[PatB]

Are we seeing the perhaps inevitable result of demanding Pendon levels of appearance from locos manufactured by mass production techniques? What can be achieved by a craftsman using brass and nickel silver may not translate well to a model assembled by a Chinese factory worker from moulded plastic components.

[rockershovel]

... I'd blame the couriers, every time. We have a system by which large numbers of parcels are delivered by sub-contracted couriers with no training of any sort, under great pressure to achieve (often unrealistic) numbers of deliveries daily, under conditions of carriage very carefully designed to exclude liability of any sort, as far as possible.

[Chamby]

As a regular purchaser of stuff from most of the leading manufacturers and retailers, I don’t think I have ever had to return items as a result of damage in transit. My biggest problem has been with steam locomotives that waddle, due to poor centering or quartering of the running gear... so a manufacturing issue.

 

My other big gripe is the way NEM coupling pockets are mounted, with the little dovetailed fixing points being prone to failure, or sometimes being a poor fit that means they either pop out or droop when in use. I have spares to hand, but they too can often be a poor fit... definitely something that would benefit from a redesign. I experience the breakage problem less after fitting Kadee couplers, they seem less prone to being snagged on things compared to tension locks, and are much easier to uncouple when removing stock from the track. So wear and tear due to stresses from tension lock couplings may be part of the problem here.

 

I am all in favour of fine detail. But as most models sold will end up on a domestic or exhibition layout, robustness must also be built into their construction or manufacturers will continue to disappoint customers. Especially with their recent changes in pricing policy...

[Steamport Southport]

For years and years modellers and collectors have wanted more detail, more accurate models, year after year but now your saying they have gone to far and should produce models as they did years ago?

 

I know my post was a bit "jokey" but I think he had a valid point.

 

 

Many modellers are used to dealing with fine detail but many are not. Some also have a degree of "clumsiness" whether they are youngsters, elderly, disabled or just generally ham-fisted. I saw one of those "box opening videos" on here a while ago and was astounding by the clumsiness of the person involved. Shaking the box vigorously? Then complaining it was damaged. Really?!  

 

I think that Hornby realised this and produced the Railroad range. However I don't think they have quite got that concept right.

 

 

I must admit I've not had any RTR model which has had any issues with damage. So I do think that many of the problems with damage is coming from transit.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[rockershovel]

It’s possibly relevant to note that by far the longest recent thread on quality issues with rtr models, relates to something which is clearly a design issue.