How bad, really, are Dapol and Farish

[Karhedron]

So, with that in mind, how do you tackle these QC issues? (Genuine question).

With better design.

A good example was the loss of quartering on early Dapol steam locos. This was a significant problem and people have even written articles about how to correct it. The solution was for Dapol to design squared axels and sockets on the wheels so that they could not slip out of quartering.

A solution to the problem of overheating motors is simply better specced motors. How much this would add to the cost of each loco is another question though.

[DesertHound]

Very interesting, Alan - thanks for posting that.

"When assembled, each loco is quality inspected and given a trial run in each direction on the test track benches. Only after passing rigorous inspection can the model move to the packing area"

Thanks newportnobby, I didn't get that far 

Dan

[sparky]

That is a great link to the production process....was the third lady on the right building my preorder of intercity livery mk2f coaches ??...i live in hope !!!

[DesertHound]

So, with that in mind, how do you tackle these QC issues? (Genuine question).

With better design.

A good example was the loss of quartering on early Dapol steam locos. This was a significant problem and people have even written articles about how to correct it. The solution was for Dapol to design squared axels and sockets on the wheels so that they could not slip out of quartering.

A solution to the problem of overheating motors is simply better specced motors. How much this would add to the cost of each loco is another question though.

Karhedron

Good point! I was looking at it from QC issues arising during the assembly process, but you are quite right, design of the actual product is another angle to look at it from.

So, we could say there are QC issues which arise from design (both design of the product and materials used - think split gears), and also from assembly (think poor pick-ups). I'm sure there's someone on here who could write an essay on this kind of thing. Any management consultants on here?

Dan

[Karhedron]

Good point! I was looking at it from QC issues arising during the assembly process, but you are quite right, design of the actual product is another angle to look at it from.

Hello,

Fair enough, design can actually help with the assembly process too. A simple example is making the parts asymetric so that they cannot be attached back-to-front or upsidedown. IIRC, a batch of tank engines were afflicted with upsidedown con rods on one occasion. Simple to fix but better to avoid in the first place.

Now that is real design clever!

[belstone]

A solution to the problem of overheating motors is simply better specced motors. How much this would add to the cost of each loco is another question though.

Farish are now using coreless motors on their new steam locos (which is going to cost me a new controller, as coreless motors don't like feedback controllers). Whether they are good quality motors or cheap and nasty, only time will tell. But I haven't heard of one failing yet.

One other side effect of small batch production (which possibly no-one cares about except me) is that it has pretty much killed off loco body kits. No point in designing and producing a kit to fit, say, a Farish Fairburn tank chassis: by the time you've got the kit to market the locos will be sold out and who knows when the next batch will be made?

It would be rather fun to design and make a simple but well-engineered 'generic' 0-6-0 chassis, 8' + 8'6" wheelbase with 4'9" drivers.  That near enough covers an awful lot of tank and tender engines.  Then offer a range of bodies, either cast or 3D printed. Might appeal to people who enjoy building models but don't have the time or skills to scratchbuild.  Maybe if the coupling thing works I'll look into that as the next project...

[Karhedron]

One other side effect of small batch production (which possibly no-one cares about except me) is that it has pretty much killed off loco body kits. No point in designing and producing a kit to fit, say, a Farish Fairburn tank chassis: by the time you've got the kit to market the locos will be sold out and who knows when the next batch will be made?

To be fair, Farish seem committed to their designs for the long run. All of their post-Poole era steam locos have been rerun on a fairly regular basis. Sure, the Fairburn may be temporarily out of stock but it will be along again in next year's catalogue. And of course there is always that auction site.

Dapol have retired a small number of models. In the case of the M7 and GWR Prairie, these designs were felt to no longer reflect the quality they aspired to. Even then, it did not stop them announcing another run of them in last year's catalogue at budget prices. The B1 has not been rerun as it lost out to the Farish version.

It would be rather fun to design and make a simple but well-engineered 'generic' 0-6-0 chassis, 8' + 8'6" wheelbase with 4'9" drivers.  That near enough covers an awful lot of tank and tender engines.  Then offer a range of bodies, either cast or 3D printed. Might appeal to people who enjoy building models but don't have the time or skills to scratchbuild.  Maybe if the coupling thing works I'll look into that as the next project...

Sounds promising. My mechanical skills are not great but I am fairly happy at building and painting so dropping a new bodyshell on a working chassis would suit me.

[DesertHound]

On the 3D printer note Belstone, do you think they could be used to produce parts for farish locos. I'm thinking gears!

Dan

[oreamnos]

[edit]
And yes, the old stuff can be made to run well if you have the confidence to strip them down (ok, not as good as the new stuff, but not terrible). Oh, that and I can get three Poole locos for one new one!

I'm not saying Poole production was better in terms of quality control (I hear it wasn't), just that the durability of the design was much better in that I can swap out parts and keep the fleet running due to their common components. If I was a rivet counter, on the other hand, I'd probably be pulling my hair out by now!
[edit]

Poole stuff was - like Bachmann and Dapol now - a mixed bag on the QC front.  You could have two identical locos and one might run great and the other not well at all.  Also, paint and decoration application could be variable, but always much simplified compared to today's liveries.

That said, I agree 100% that the one thing Poole stuff really had going for it was you could strip an entire model completlely down into its component parts very easily and they went back together much the same.  So you really could make a model run better by yourself just by tinkering with it and I found that immensely satisfying.  Maybe some people can still do that with the current crop of new models but my advancing age and the finer and more fragile detail have put that beyond my skills.  Even getting the body shells off some of the new diesels is now a challenge for me the way they fit so tightly to chassis nowadays!

Because the latest stuff looks so much better than the old I really don't bring out my old Poole models anymore to run.  The decoration on even the early Bachmann split-chassis models is so much better than the Poole stuff - and it runs better, too - that even though the split chassis locos generally use the same Poole body shells (aside from the Peaks which aren't Poole), I run those models instead.  It doesn't hurt I still can also strip down the split chassis mechanisms.

I still run my split chassis BachFar models (e.g. 40s, 50s, and 55s) on my club's modular layout at exibitions but I do so somewhat self-conciously.  I'm the only British outline modeller in the club; everyone else runs US outline and frankly all their Atlas and Kato stock makes the split-chassis stuff look like it crawled out from under a rock (the Peaks perhaps excepted).  At the last show I actually ended up running an Ixion Manor, a Farish Peak, a Farish Warship, a Dapol Western, a Farish DP1, and a Dapol blue/grey HST set simply because I felt those locos could still hold a candle to the superb looking US and Continental models my club-mates were running!

I return for exchange about 30% or more of the loco models I receive regardless of who was the manufacturer.  I don't think I'm particularly fussy, either.  Am I diappointed when I have to do that?  You bet.  The flip side of that of course is the elation I have when I recieve a model that is correct in all respects!

Matt

[DesertHound]

Hi Matt, a good (and fair) summary IMHO. Probably better than I managed to articulate it.

Good to see that you're flying the flag for British N in the USA! 

Now, if on,y there WAS a model railway club out here! More chance of snow falling in these parts methinks ... or even rain for that matter!

Dan

[oreamnos]

Good point! I was looking at it from QC issues arising during the assembly process, but you are quite right, design of the actual product is another angle to look at it from.

Hello,

Fair enough, design can actually help with the assembly process too. A simple example is making the parts asymetric so that they cannot be attached back-to-front or upsidedown. IIRC, a batch of tank engines were afflicted with upsidedown con rods on one occasion. Simple to fix but better to avoid in the first place.

Now that is real design clever!

I agree, but even when parts are designed in such a way to only go together one way they can still be put together wrong.  The original release of the Farish 3MT tank included quite a few locos where the dome was glued on backwards - see: http://www.ehattons.com/52824/Graham_Farish_372_328_Standard_Class_3MT_2_6_2_Tank_82026_BR_lined_black_with_early_emblem/StockDetail.aspx

I bought one of these locos pre-owned from Hattons at a big discount and it had the backwards dome.  When I punched it off so that I could put in on the right way (not as easy as it sounds since it was glued on quite strongly!) it was obvious the underside of the dome had a key intentionallly moulded onto it so that it could fit only one way onto the top of the boiler.  So even though it had been designed to aid in correct assembly, the design didn't work.

I think you have to couple good design with educating the assemblers so that they understand how the finished product should look.  A single photograph stuck on the wall of the assemly room could go a long way in correcting assembly errors.

Matt

[DCCDave]

Many years ago I instigated a change in a sales team, so that instead of earning commission on the selling price of a job they earned commission on the profit for a job. This had the effect of immediately stopping them selling complex jobs at knock down prices.

Perhaps a similar method should be used to reward assemblers of these locos. If they were paid on a scale which reduced as the percentage of failures increased then they may be more minded to assemble the models correctly. I suppose though, that they get paid peanuts and the cost of implementing such a change would be too great. I can't see where their incentive to get it right comes from.

Cheers
Dave

[DesertHound]

Spot on Dave. Peanuts it most probably is! Reminds me of a funny story I was thinking about earlier when my dad came out to the Middle East to visit.

There was some construction going on nearby at a T-junction (nothing new there in these parts!) and 24/7 there would be a worker either side of the road with a piece of rope in his hand, which would be lowered and raised to signify right of way to traffic. So, for a T-junction that is six chaps, 24 hours a day.

Dad: why don't they get a portable traffic light to do that job?
Me: Dad, that would cost more money!

My dad was only here for three weeks ... it went on for more like three months!

Draw your own conclusions on the cost of labour in certain parts of the world!

[belstone]

So why does the dome on a 3MT need to be moulded as a separate item anyway?

[oreamnos]

So why does the dome on a 3MT need to be moulded as a separate item anyway?

I don't know enough about the prototype to answer.  I am hoping someone else does and responds.

Pure speculation, but my guess is that there was some variation in the domes on the prototype and Farish therefore tried to build some flexibilty into the design so that it could model those variations.

Matt