'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, Bucoops said:

The GER and I believe some others made extensive use of plonking2x 4wheel bodies onto a bogie underframe.

 

 

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

As Hattons have done all the hard work, wouldn't a cut and shut, with an obvious nod to the cost, be an acceptable way to a generic bogie coach?

 

Mike.

 

Agreed - and I wouldn't have thought it that much of a leap for Hattons to use their existing design work (i.e. the bodies) to come up with a RTR bogie offering based on that exact premise of two Genesis bodies being combined on a bogie underframe..

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by phil-b259

[gr.king]

Or if you are inclined to make at least the minimum of effort to make something, you could build a simple floor with solebars and footboards (try three layers of 1mm plastikard with Z section strip along the edges), add buffers, basic trussing (wire and split pins), choice of either gas tanks or dyno and battery boxes, a brake cylinder and V-hangers, fit a couple of Fox bogies (kit built or other) and unite two short bodies of choice neatly...

 

You don't have to ask somebody else to provide everything you want.

[JohnR]

17 minutes ago, gr.king said:

You don't have to ask somebody else to provide everything you want.

 

But many people, myself included do. (Or at least large parts of it). 

[toby_tl10]

20 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

However what manufactures can take away from the Hattons experience is that there is a market out there for CAREFULLY RESEARCHED 'generic' coaches and if someone feels up to designing a bogie 'Generic' coach (with the same careful attention to detail as Hattons have done) then they will most likely sell well.

That's a wild idea. First of all you need (at least) two lengths. Then the roof, clerestory/not, flat/curved profile. These two seem the most obvious to me. There is a possibility it would work I suppose...

 

Exodus coaches maybe?

Edited December 14, 2022 by toby_tl10

[Compound2632]

22 minutes ago, gr.king said:

Or if you are inclined to make at least the minimum of effort to make something, you could build a simple floor with solebars and footboards (try three layers of 1mm plastikard with Z section strip along the edges), add buffers, basic trussing (wire and split pins), choice of either gas tanks or dyno and battery boxes, a brake cylinder and V-hangers, fit a couple of Fox bogies (kit built or other) and unite two short bodies of choice neatly...

 

You don't have to ask somebody else to provide everything you want.

 

Of course one could; some will.

 

Hattons made a commercial decision that these carriages were worth a punt. No doubt they would make the step to bogie carriages if they thought they would also make a decent return on them.

 

  

1 minute ago, toby_tl10 said:

That's a wild idea. First of all you need (at least) two lengths. Then the roof, clerestory/not, flat/curved profile. These two seem the most obvious to me. There is a possibility it would work I suppose...

 

Why more than one length? (Which anyway isn't an obstacle, as we see from the 4 & 6-wheelers.)

Why more than one roof profile? (One size has fitted all for the 4 & 6 wheelers.)

Remember, they're prototype-literate freelance carriages. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Compound2632

[phil-b259]

28 minutes ago, gr.king said:

Or if you are inclined to make at least the minimum of effort to make something, you could build a simple floor with solebars and footboards (try three layers of 1mm plastikard with Z section strip along the edges), add buffers, basic trussing (wire and split pins), choice of either gas tanks or dyno and battery boxes, a brake cylinder and V-hangers, fit a couple of Fox bogies (kit built or other) and unite two short bodies of choice neatly...

 

You don't have to ask somebody else to provide everything you want.

 

Agreed - but its rather tiresome to have yet another post which seems to ignore the fact that there are plenty of railway modellers who are either lacking spare time, facilities or have health / dexterity issues which precludes kit building - or whos skill at painting / lining said kit in the ornate manor of may pre-grouping railways is lacking.

 

I think we all know that kit / scratch building is possible - and if you can do that then great- we don't need reminding thank you!

 

But for those of us who can't kit / scratch build I don't see why our requests for RTR versions should be put down with a 'go build a kit' type response - particularly on a thread discussing a RTR product!.

 

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

15 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

That's a wild idea. First of all you need (at least) two lengths. Then the roof, clerestory/not, flat/curved profile. These two seem the most obvious to me. There is a possibility it would work I suppose...

 

 

It would be tricky but I would have thought that following the Genesis idea of picking the most common underframe / body length (note the Genesis coaches are ALL the same length) but varying the roof / body itself would still be doable.

 

Far too many seem to be focusing on exactitudes - they forget that the genesis coach range was arrived at by picking the most common elements (including length) thereby minimising tooling costs but still providing variety rather than slavishly following prototypes.

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by phil-b259

[gr.king]

32 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Agreed - but its rather tiresome to have yet another post which seems to ignore the fact that there are plenty of railway modellers who are either lacking spare time, facilities or have health / dexterity issues which precludes kit building - or whos skill at painting / lining said kit in the ornate manor of may pre-grouping railways is lacking.

 

I think we all know that kit / scratch building is possible - and if you can do that then great- we don't need reminding thank you!

 

But for those of us who can't kit / scratch build I don't see why our requests for RTR versions should be put down with a 'go build a kit' type response - particularly on a thread discussing a RTR product!.

 

 

 

No ornate painting/lining required if two existing decorated bodies are united end-to end. Careful trimming of the roof overhang and any other protruding details on the inner ends prior to joining would do the job. Little in the way of time, facilities or even dexterity really required too.

[toby_tl10]

34 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

It would be tricky but I would have thought that following the Genesis idea of picking the most common underframe / body length (note the Genesis coaches are ALL the same length) but varying the roof / body itself would still be doable.

4 and 6 wheel coaches are of different lengths, as pointed out by Stephen (Coumpound2632).

I concede on the roof being flat or curved - one size will fit all.

 

But clerestory or not, I think it has to be different. You can't make one model represent both a clerestory coach and a non-clerestory one. Which one would be commercially more viable? Or would it be viable to produce both? Does simply swapping out the roof work?

[JohnR]

I think that if you were capable or had the inclination to scratchbuild a bogie coach out of a couple of 4 wheelers, you'd be capable or have the inclination to build a kit of an exact prototype bogie coach - there are plenty available. 

 

Is there a market for such a coach, ie is there enough people willing to buy something that "looks mostly right". I think there is. 

[phil-b259]

31 minutes ago, gr.king said:

 

No ornate painting/lining required if two existing decorated bodies are united end-to end. Careful trimming of the roof overhang and any other protruding details on the inner ends prior to joining would do the job. Little in the way of time, facilities or even dexterity really required too.

 

Ah I see what you are getting at.

 

However with the Hattons coaches selling out either before or shortly after arrival the raw material is in short supply for such 'cut & shut' operations

[phil-b259]

22 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

4 and 6 wheel coaches are of different lengths, as pointed out by Stephen (Coumpound2632).

 

I apologise - it was a quick glance at the models I have sitting before me led me to conclude they were the same length

 

24 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

But clerestory or not, I think it has to be different. You can't make one model represent both a clerestory coach and a non-clerestory one.

 

Why not?

 

The only difficulty is if there was a lack of clerestory and plain roofed vehicles of the same length operating on UK railways.

 

25 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

 Does simply swapping out the roof work?

 

Thats what Hattons have done so they can represent oil, gas and electric light fitted versions

[Compound2632]

24 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

But clerestory or not, I think it has to be different. You can't make one model represent both a clerestory coach and a non-clerestory one. Which one would be commercially more viable? Or would it be viable to produce both? Does simply swapping out the roof work?

 

You are perhaps over-estimating the prevalence of clerestory carriages. But you're right, an alternative roof with clerestory would not affect any other aspect of the design.

[Enterprisingwestern]

32 minutes ago, JohnR said:

I think that if you were capable or had the inclination to scratchbuild a bogie coach out of a couple of 4 wheelers

 

 

Come on now, it's hardly scratchbuilding is it?

That's why I suggested just a simple cut and shut, something perfectly do-able and a skill reasonably easily learnt, especially by building the chassis in the way espoused above, or even using a rtr chassis.

Just a personal opinion, but there are too many people in this world, modellers included, who were born in a bottle and never got past the neck.

 

Mike.

[melmerby]

12 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

The only difficulty is if there was a lack of clerestory and plain roofed vehicles of the same length operating on UK railways.

The GWR did it

They also did 4 and 6 wheel versions of same length & width carriages.

e.g. G15 & G19 both 31' x 8', with 6 wheels. G19 had a 3 centre roof, G15 a Clerestory. Both built in 1892 on successive lots.

T32 was also a 3 centre roofed 31' x 8' but with 4 wheels

 

These variations were built together over more than a 10 year period, probably longer, around the 1890s

There also seemed to be no standard carriage length, with 4 wheel carriages in 25', 26', 27', 28' & 31' lengths plus some at intermediate lengths

The 6 wheelers were more consistent, with just 31' & 33' lengths.

Many of all these could also be found in two widths, 8' & 8' 6".

 

The bogie carriages were no different being in sizes from the high 30s to high 50s feet in length and 8' & 8' 6 wide, some clerestory, some not.

 

 

 

 

[phil-b259]

15 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Come on now, it's hardly scratchbuilding is it?

That's why I suggested just a simple cut and shut, something perfectly do-able and a skill reasonably easily learnt, especially by building the chassis in the way espoused above, or even using a rtr chassis.

Just a personal opinion, but there are too many people in this world, modellers included, who were born in a bottle and never got past the neck.

 

Mike.

 

Point still stands - a cut and shut still requires accurate cuts, particularly if the desire is to avoid a repaint. To achieve such precision requires a steady hand a keen eye and the right sort of tools. A combination not everyone has (or has the ability to acquire) - particularly those whos issues are medically rooted like suffers of bi-lateral tremors.

 

I accept though that there are probably a large number of folk that 'could but won't' - however that in itself does not mean those who 'can and do' have the right to be judgemental about them, nor their desire for certain things to be available RTR.

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by phil-b259

[Jol Wilkinson]

50 minutes ago, JohnR said:

I think that if you were capable or had the inclination to scratch build a bogie coach out of a couple of 4 wheelers, you'd be capable or have the inclination to build a kit of an exact prototype bogie coach - there are plenty available. 

 

Is there a market for such a coach, ie is there enough people willing to buy something that "looks mostly right". I think there is. 

I think that, while most people could build a carriage from a Slaters or Ratio plastic moulded kit (other makes may be available), it is the painting and lining - especially for pre-group models - that most would find a deterrent. It is not actually that difficult  (I learned how to do it!) but requires time, the right tools, some suitable guidance (there is no shortage of books, articles and DVDs available) and the desire to do it.

 

It is often a lack of confidence that gets in the way. We seem less willing to have a go at something and risk failure. The education system no longer appears to teach basic manual skills, some simple processes and techniques, such as soldering, are seen as a black art, fewer clubs have a "lets try to make it" philosophy, while conspicuous consumption remains an indication of status in society. What you can buy/own beats what you can do/make.

 

The success of the Hattons generic coaches does show that people are very willing to buy rolling stock that " looks mostly right". Whether the same would apply to locomotives is another matter, as many topics on RMweb would appear to show..

[Dunsignalling]

I'd be very surprised if the idea of generic bogie coaches hasn't been circulating in at least two locations ever since the popularity of the 4 and 6-wheelers became evident.

 

However, Hatton's might not have the resources available to do something with it whilst they have much of the existing project still to deliver.

 

There's a vague rumour circulating that the other likely candidate may be similarly committed, but in another direction altogether. 😉

 

John

 

 

[PhilJ W]

5 hours ago, Bucoops said:

The GER and I believe some others made extensive use of plonking2x 4wheel bodies onto a bogie underframe.

 

The Southern Railway also used to 'cut and shut' four and six wheeler bodies and mount them on bogie frames, and then they electrified them too.

2 hours ago, gr.king said:

 

No ornate painting/lining required if two existing decorated bodies are united end-to end. Careful trimming of the roof overhang and any other protruding details on the inner ends prior to joining would do the job. Little in the way of time, facilities or even dexterity really required too.

If you carefully cut down the door shut lines with a fine saw  you can keep things such as lining intact.

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The success of the Hattons generic coaches does show that people are very willing to buy rolling stock that " looks mostly right". Whether the same would apply to locomotives is another matter, as many topics on RMweb would appear to show..

 

There is a hierarchy within this Hobby like it or not with locos coming top - thats why manufacturers have been quite content to release models with absolutely noting appropriate to put behind them.

 

The Hattons Genesis project has to some degree its roots in this omission - providing RTR stock to go with them.

Edited December 14, 2022 by phil-b259

[Dunsignalling]

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

There is a hierarchy within this Hobby like it or not with locos coming top - thats why manufacturers have been quite content to release models with absolutely noting appropriate to put behind them.

 

The Hattons Genesis project has to some degree its roots in this omission - providing RTR stock to go with them.

Discounting O gauge tinplate from much longer ago, Hornby really started the "generic" business way back in "The Year of the Coach" (1979, iirc).

 

There were a couple of half-way reasonable GWR examples, (also thinly disguised as SR) plus some rather dubious LMS and LNER approximations, all on a common underframe. All still readily available in the Railroad range.

 

John

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Hornby really started the "generic" business way back in "The Year of the Coach" (1979, iirc).

 

Yet another way in which 2022 is coming to resemble 1979?

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

some simple processes and techniques, such as soldering, are seen as a black art

Indeed

At Squires stand at Warley this year was a chap asking one of the staff about soldering iron bits and the problems he was having.

Eventually it turned out that each time the bit needed a clean he used a file and wondered why it wouldn't tin well and didn't last long.

No doubt he felt a bit of an idiot and also relieved when it was explained that these days you should only clean the bit with something like a wet sponge.

 

Something so simple missing from his knowledge base was spoiling his soldering efforts.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

14 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

There is a hierarchy within this Hobby like it or not with locos coming top - thats why manufacturers have been quite content to release models with absolutely noting appropriate to put behind them.

 

The Hattons Genesis project has to some degree its roots in this omission - providing RTR stock to go with them.

Neatly hit the proverbial nail the right way up. In my case a list of models all dressed up and nowhere to go include a couple of Terriers, ditto Precedents a Coal Tank and an Adams Jubilee from OO Works on order. The arrival of the Genesis coaches has meant that there is now work for models idling their time away..and yes I know all about Rule 1.🤭

[D9020 Nimbus]

More like 1978, surely? The "Winter of Discontent" that ran on until March 1979 or so?

 

There wasn't a postal strike that winter though. For that, you have to go back to early 1971—a continuous all-out strike that lasted, IIRC, about 3 months.

 

(reply to @Compound2632)

Edited December 14, 2022 by D9020 Nimbus