Let's make this a bit more interesting............A COMPETITION
1) The Prize
One of my handbuilt vans see photos below(retail value £140GBP?) ......a Cheshire Lines Committee (GNR-built) 10 ton van as per photo (the prize model will be finished with CL lettering).
The CLC was jointly owned by the GCR, GNR and Midland, in equal shares.
(//)
2) The Competition
To design, build and fully document (including costings) a working Gauge 3 model locomotive of any BRITISH prototype, using easily obtainable parts, principally with hand tools (electric bench drill being only concession to workshop equipment) and suitable for construction by a BEGINNER with little or no previous experience of loco building from scratch.
Budget for project 140GBP maximum.
3) The Winner will be the person who, in the opinion of the judges, has produced the most practical solution to the problem of providing a low cost entry level G3 model.
SIMPLE RULES
1) Any G3 Forum member may participate (whether or not a G3 Society member) with the exception of the Judges.
2) Closing date for entries 31st March 2012.
3) Voting will be by a panel of three Judges and their decision will be final.
4) Proprietory (purchased) components such as wheels, motors, gears and control electronics are permissible but the overall product should be predominantly scratch built.
REGISTRATION
Send an email to G3madesimple@gauge3.org.uk stating your intention to participate and an instruction pack outlining the documentation requirements will be sent.
A Great Idea. I personally think the budget is a little generous at £140 -but maybe not everyone is as tight fisted as I am???
Looking at the limitations of the competition -to me the only locomotive to build is a Type 2 level LMS 10,800. My dabs are on it. So there!!!
If I win could I ask that a donation be made to "The Great Ormand St Hospital For Sick Children" which I feel will be more useful rather than winning a van.
regards
ralph
That's a very kind offer John - and a very nice prize too (one I'd like to have!) :).
As a suggestion, it would be nice if we could have a display of entries at the 2012 AGM on 18th Feb.
I know not everyone will be able to attend but I'm sure Members would like see any entries that can be there. The AGM is about eight months away, which should be enough time for people to get an engine ready.
Regards,
Ian T
Ralph,
1) The factors taken into account by the Judges will include total cost of project (assuming all other factors are equal, a lower cost project will have an advantage).
Other factors will include ease of construction, ready availability of parts and perceived popularity of prototype selected.
2) If you were to win, a donation equivalent to the cost of the materials required to produce the van (estimated at c. 60GBP) would be in order.
Ian,
Perhaps I should amend terms of entry so that Judges' decision can be announced at the AGM....which would require a closing date at the end of January?
I need three volunteers to be Judges.
If you wish to submit an entry to the competition, then don't feel you have to volunteer to be a Judge.
Regards,
John.
Ermm
Chaps i have already done this a certain blue engine remember. And it is based on the prototype as per the tv series which in turn is based on the LBSC E2 tank.
Mark
Well that's very true Mark - but the basic blue 'part' probably cost you about 100 pounds - so that only leaves you 40 quid for the extended axles (and a new paint job of course!)
But please don't let me discourage you....
:D
This is brilliant, but ALL Society members must be invited to participate
Ian H,
You will (as a Committee Member) have received my email with "G3 Made Simple" campaign ideas and I suggest that this be promoted in the next Newsletter.
Meanwhile, I am hoping it will be possible to circulate details of this competition along with the incorporation ballot papers which will be going out before too long.
Regards,
John.
I note that Ralph thinks that a Budget of £140 is generous, but if this is to be a simple construction exercise (without a lathe, etc.) that a beginner can follow then the component purchases of wheels, motor/gearbox, bearings, buffers, etc. (plus battery & radio control items for those not using 2-rail pickup) will more than eat that up.
Just checking the usual model railway supplies wheels will cost £36 to £40+ per axle and a motor gearbox for a 1/4" axle cost approx £80. So for the beginner who has never built a G3 loco could we have some suggestions of where they these items can be purchased cheaper - or to be realistic maybe the budget need increasing!?
Derek.
Quote from: Derek King on Jun 24 2011 23:15
could we have some suggestions of where they these items can be purchased cheaper !?
Reasonably priced motor units here for G1 and G scale: Peter Spoerer Model Engineers (http://www.peterspoerermodelengineers.com/90275/info.php?p=7)
Probably worth an enquiry to see if they could be easily adapted to G3.
Andy
What do you mean Ian a new paint job the blue engine is a fine example of a Gauge 3 Engine at its best.
Joking aside the Thomas and Percy can now be attained for around the £70.00 mark from some shops. This would cut down on the outgoing cost and save a bit of the £140.00 budget. Additionally have you considered buying a cheap secondhand LGB power unit bogie. These are tough reliable and very smooth running. GRS have used these on several of their G3 loco kits and I even have two LGB power bogies on my class 73 diesel. You can normally pick some items up at the Garden railway shows or look through the G Scale Society webpage for a chassis block or a donor loco that you do not mind robbing for spares.
Mark
How do re gauge the motor blocks mark? Ive been searching for a motor unit for 1/4'' axles and found nothing below £80 for the shunter I'm doing.
If GRS did a body kit in plastic up sized from their shunter bodies they did now it could be a good starting point. Or even plans that could be used as templates to cut out plastic sheet to produce a body. Also I lost the contact details but someone at the AGM was showing off a nice little brass Ruston diesel.....
The Ruston 48DS is one of Richard Thompson's projects (he is the G3S Exhibitions Manager and a Committee Member...also forum member "Richard T" and you can send him a message via the forum messaging system).
A reminder that a lot has been discussed previously on this topic of low cost power units and "starter" kits.....it might be worth recent forum members reviewing the content of that board which ran to more than 100 messages.
http://lakes-pages.com/gauge3.co.uk/G3Forum/index.php?topic=389.0
I designed as "a personal project" a motor bogie which I called "Module 03" which is what I am going to use to power the two bogies of the LMS 10,800. I am going to make them out of Brass rather than Steel as this will be more expensive -but easier to use. This uses MFA RE380 motors and Muffet MOD1 gears 12, 27 and 45 to a Brandbright RSA37 wheel. The only real problem with it is the fact that the axle on the wheel set is 1/4 inch and I will have to bore the gear wheel from 6mm to 1/4 inch -and then pin it to the axle. I expect to have two functioning bogies for £60. The frame work will be made from 5mm pin strip and 2mm thick MDF from B&Q and then plated with 60 thous ABS sheet from GRS. I then plan to "blow" quite a lot of my dosh on bits to encust the model with bits from Cambrian, IP Engineering, Brandbright and GRS. Added to this there will be bits from the local Habershers and card craft shop.
I plan to have it as a PWAM controlled model with one controller per bogie -both running from the one Pot. There will be a 12V SLA 7Ah battery providing juice. Slide switches will select fwd/rev direction and of course on/off. Relays and fuses and surge varisters -all the normal stuff.
As to £140 being a little tight on the wallet...
(http://www.cabbagepatchrailway.co.uk/metrovickpic47.jpg)
The total cost of the build was £187.08p over the course of 9 months OR £4.80p per week over 39 weeks...
This included the purchase of the following:
Giant Cod 2.4Ghz 4 Channel Tx and Rx £27.42p
Electronize FR8T-PS £36.60p
So I don't see the £140 limit as being that restrictive, since if you do the maths the model above could have
been built for £123.06p.
regards
ralph
Post Scriptumn: John, my son would like to join the competition -he is currently 11. He would like to enter his LMS 1831.
Ralph,
I can see no reason why Matthew should not be allowed to enter (the competition requires skill and therefore does not fall within the restrictions imposed by the Gambling Act, 2005).
Regards,
John.
Prob not the place to post this sorry, but I cant message Richard- or you i'm afraid the error code 'Many apologies, but you can't view just any profile' is there something im doing wrong?
Simon.
Hello Simon,
You should be able to send a message by selecting the "My Messages" tab and composing your message.
If this is not working for you, then please email me webmaster@gauge3.org.uk and I will sort out the problem.
Regards,
John.
You're clicking on the name of the person posting the message rather than the message name
Well the first one is out of the starting blocks...
I have hunted around my bits box and the net and started work.
I have a "working drawing" about 45% complete. This is not a super scale model, but rather one that will be easy to build -dimensions are to the nearest millimetre. The "beer mat" accounts show that I have "spent" £52.66p of my dosh at current prices and I think that I am on target for a set of bogies for £60(?)
lms 10,800 costings
9 feet bogie plates g3 £5.00
4mm ball races technobots £9.52
ESC eBay £14.00
motors size e technobots £11.92
RSA37 wheels brandbright £26.22
gears muffet £(?)
SLA technobots £9.31
I will know more about the cost of the bodywork when I visit B&Q on Wednesday morning...
regards
ralph
Hi Hornbeam
To re-gauge Thomas/Percy you need to take a pattern of the original axle and increase the length by 18.5mm. Drill and tap the end of the axle with a 6BA tap and mill a D shape into each end of the axle (90 degrees opposing) and take off 20thou so the wheels can lock into position for the correct quartering. Additionall you will need new brass top hat bearings for each wheel to stop the body of the engine sliding to the extreme left or right from the centre line.
To re-gauge the diesels LGB power bogiesl I used 6mm steel rod cut to length with a hacksaw and the wheels where loctited on to the correct gauge. Again to prevent it sliding to the extrem left or right some collars were installed. A piece of steel tube with a 6.5mm internal diameter of which 8 were cut to the required length. Admittedly all the axles and collars were spun up on the lathe in order to de burr each end of each piece. But thats how it was done hope that answers your question.
By the way some suppliers are selling the Thomas/Percy at around the £70.00 mark and if you wish to get hold of an LGB motor block or old second hand donor loco for parts then it is worth checking out the LGB webpages and their forums. Sometimes a reasonably priced item will appear.
Mark
Mark,
Milling would seem to rule this out completely in the spirit of John's competition, unless a source of these can be found ready made.
If I understand the rules correctly, maybe Richard.T's Ruston is nearest to the spirit of the competition? And isn't another small engine being developed in the North East - (T'other John????)
Mike
I have now drafted the competition rules and these can be downloaded and printed from
http://gauge3.org.uk/G3_Made_Simple_Competition_Entry.pdf
The "tear-off" form will need to be submitted with each entry (it grants permission to the Gauge 3 Society to publish and make use of the material submitted).
My thanks to Ralph for his valuable input in preparing the specifications.
John.
Ok -so how many others have entered the fray?
My drawing is about 85% done and I have started on the instruction manual -I have even cut some metal!!! The hardest job today was deciding how to make the door louvres -I need 36 sets of 5 slots each. The method I have chosen is simple -but boring...
For those not familiar with the loco:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_10800 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_10800)
I have only had a set of "vanity plates" made for one of my locos -but for this I think I will order a set.
The working name of the loco is in line with my humour...
regards
ralph
John....
OMG(!) I have never known anyone like you....
Why have you included this in the Rules?
QUOTE:
As a condition of entry to the competition, all entrants agree to assign to the Committee and Members of The Gauge 3 Society (and their successors in title) copyright and other intellectual property rights in the material submitted and agree that the material may be used in any way that the Society deems fit (an acknowledgement of the authorship of the material will be given in conjunction with any publication).
UNQUOTE:
I did request that you make the rules more a fun thing to do and read less like an insurance claims form. I would urge you to get rid of it and re-write the entire of the second page. This legalistic phraseology is meaningless as PLAIN ENGLISH is all that is required.
Try again....
regards
ralph
Ok -a fresh look in the morning and that 69 word sentence(?) is still as unusable...
try this:
"One of the conditions of entry is the fact that the Gauge '3' Society will be able to use the designs and information that you enter. They will edit and alter it to fit requirements. The design and text remain yours and a credit to that fact will be used in all articles."
53 Words all in PLAIN ENGLISH. And while we are here the following 61 words "sentence":
QUOTE:
I submit the accompanying project as identified by the description above and, in accordance with the rules of entry for this competition, assign to the Committee and Members of the Gauge 3 Society (and their successors in title) all rights to use the material submitted herewith in such manner as they think fit for the promotion of gauge 3 railway modelling.
UNQUOTE:
Having submitted the above to a Reading Age test -I find that the required reading age is 135... Try to write for normal people who will read it -this is not some legal submission whose sole purpose is to exist in files... I now understand why all the documentation used by my former company was in German -as there is no such thing as "Legal German".
regards
ralph
Good Morning Ralph!
I read the first of your two messages at 2.00 am ..... I had spent the previous two hours disassembling the the chassis of the GRS 4F, having at midnight run the first powered test only to find that the motor/gearbox unit is defective....the gears have not been cut correctly and the teeth "jump" at a certain point in the rotation.
Having substituted the unit from the "Dean Goods" kit, I then went to bed.
First priority this morning was to phone GRS for a replacement.
Apparently the gear sets are cut by a chap referred to as "Peter" who does it on a 1940's lathe and "by eye" rather than CNC with the consequence that the result is not as consistent or accurate as GRS would like but the work is done to a price.
A point arising from my conversation with GRS and which may be of interest to any entrants in this competition intending to make use of Buehler and Mabuchi motors is that GRS are currently unable to obtain any from their US supplier (apparently even the big "USA Trains" company which uses them is unable to obtain supplies).
Returning to the "small print".
I understand your reasoning but as a Committee member, I have a duty to the Membership at large to take reasonable steps to protect their interests.
While you and I may be generous of spirit, there may be those less generous who, at a later date, may wish to reclaim rights over their material or even start an action for breach of copyright/intellectual property theft.
As a compromise between a full blown Deed of Assignment and seeking no protection, I opted for the simple Declaration.
Part of the problem lies with the fact that the Society is currently unincorporated and "title to property" can only be held by individuals (i.e. the Members and Committee in particular). The reference to "successors in title" is to cover the eventuality that the Society elects to incorporate in which case title would pass to the company.
I did try to make the overall competition rules as "friendly" as possible but in the main it is a statement of parameters and "facts are facts".
I would welcome comments from others on whether or not they consider the "conditions of entry" to be reasonable : I am not unwilling to consider alterations but would like additional input.
Regards,
John.
Then the answer is simple. State that any and all information is deemed to lie in the "Public Domain" in accordance with "The GNU General Public Licence ver 2.0". This will enable anyone to copy and build models from the designs, print build instructions and modifications to their hearts content. This also means that any builder or designer has the use of any technique or design for later use.
There have been cases where "intellectual copyright" has fouled up royally...
regards
ralph
Ralph,
It boils down as to "intent" : My intention is that the designs become Society property and spearhead a "G3 Made Simple" campaign (now and in the future).
These designs may even become a component of a separate domain www.g3madesimple.org.uk
If made subject to a public licence, that would negate the "value" to the Society.
Are the G1MRA and Gauge0 "project" locos. "public" property or do they retain the copyright (I think the latter)?
Even if the G3 Made Simple designs were to become "public" property, the Society would still need a form of "Release" from the designers to avoid subsequent "ownership" claims.
Regards,
John.
Having consulted with the Senior Partner of the third largest Legal Partnership in Derby...
1: Use of the GNU General Public Licence ver 2.0 will allow you to do what you wish with no further legal requirements, release forms etc -provided that you state its application in this context. This applies now especially as the G3S is an unincorporated associated and can have no intellectual property rights.
2: The spirit of the GNU GPL2.0 allows the designer to say "This is my gift to the world" as it negates any concept of "copyright" and instead introduces the concept of "copyleft".
End of Legal section.
Here I express my personal opinions. The idea of a competition is a very good one. The token prize or donation for efforts is also a good one. The publication of all the designs (winner and losers) for the reading of the general public to promote G3 is a good one. As this will show the skill, dedication and enthusiasm of the designers and builders to their models. I embrace the concept of the GNU GPL2.0 as I publish all my designs to the web for all to see and use. I don't charge a penny for any of them and I give my time freely in pursuit of it. I would say that you remove the legalistic rubbish from this and get back to the business of having a fun competition.
I will say to my wife when she crashes her laptop -"You are not a computer Geek" -to which she will reply "You have no Voice in Court"...
regards
ralph
Ralph,
The primary issue here is whether or not the Society wishes to retain copyright as is the case, for example, with G1MRA's "Project" and "Dee"?
If so, then the GNU licence is not the appropriate course.... on this aspect I will seek the views of the other Committee members.
Remember, this competition was a "spur of the moment" decision and such aspects have not been considered in detail.
On the question of "title", I have already covered the point that, being currently unincorporated, title would have to be held by an individual Committee member or members but, since the competition does not close until next year, the Committee anticipates that incorporation may by then have been effected.
Cannot spare any more time on this discussion over the next few days since I am trying to get the 4F kit completed in time for Ampthill on Saturday......and there are still a few snags to sort out as well as final painting.
Regards,
John.
P.S. It is normal that the organiser of a competition sets the rules : The competitors abide by those rules.
I am willing to listen but at the end of the day I will have the final say.
Very Well Then...
The following Documents are published under the GNU General Public Licence ver 2.0. They are deemed to be Exemplars to prove the concept of producing a scratch built locomotive and associated documentation.
http://www.cabbagepatchrailway.co.uk/mls/wondering/exemplar1.png (http://www.cabbagepatchrailway.co.uk/mls/wondering/exemplar1.png)
http://www.cabbagepatchrailway.co.uk/mls/wondering/exemplar.pdf (http://www.cabbagepatchrailway.co.uk/mls/wondering/exemplar.pdf)
Sorry that the formatting using "tabs" has gone amiss -this sometimes happens(?)
regards
ralph
Ralph,
I am a loss to understand the reason why you have published the material relating to 10800 under a "public" licence.
I know you don't like the proposed terms of entry to the competition but you have now made it impossible to comply with the terms of entry and assign the benefit of the design to the Gauge 3 Society.
Was it your intention to exclude yourself from the competition?
If so, that is a great pity.
As a member of the Society yourself, I fail to understand why you would not wish the Society to benefit.
Regards,
John.
The reason is simple, it is also one that you could never understand.
I understand it.
My Wife understands it.
My Son understands it.
Several millions of people all over the world understand it.
QUOTE:
Was it is your intention to exclude yourself from the competition?
UNQUOTE:
Yes. I know exactly what I am doing. The software used to produce the drawings and documentation for the loco were Open Office.org and Gimp with some DIAG and Cyberduck routines. Therefore I could not in all honesty submit them.
regards
ralph
When I first read about this competition I thought it was a great idea which would be both fun for the members and beneficial for the Gauge 3 hobby. I even intended entering from Australia.
Unfortunately it has been ruined by the passion some people have for rules and documentation and has now degenerated into a political bunfight.
I think that the competition rules should be reduced to the simplest possible such as:
Rule 1: Models entered should be sent to ....... not later than DD/MM/YY.
Rule 2: A costing of all the components should be supplied with the models. The total should be less than 140 pounds.
Rule 3: Models must be Gauge 3 and will be judged on originality, quality and the use of simple tools in construction.
Rule 4: Entries will be exhibited at the AGM where owners can collect them
Rule 5: There are no more rules.
Regards
Peter
When originally asked for ideas for the documentation this is what I sent:
To: "John R F Candy"
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: LMS 10,800
Working from first principles.
I would say that you need a list of suppliers for parts and the rough costs of the parts. Plus I would say if you needed a particular tool (such as the infamous 7.1mm or nastier to find 7.35mm drill) then I would include that as well -a 7.0 or 7.5mm drill would be considered a std available tool.
Each module and constructional section needs a photo and a drawing. I did specify "When I was Secretary" that all drawings were in PNG and all photos in JPG format.
A running total for the project at the end of each constructional section as well (at the end) a total and parts list for each supplier. Possibly some thought should be given to alternate suppliers and materials (eg Brass is easier to use -but Steel is cheaper).
I would also include a "difficulty rating" for the section and expected problems that will be encountered. There should be some idea of timescale taken for the operation, (allow to set overnight etc).
I hate to say this but I would also say that all dimensions and parts will HAVE to be in Metric. I know that I cannot get away from a 1/4 inch axle diameter for my (pre-made) wheels -so I will have to "fork out" for a 1/4 inch drill to bore my 6mm bore gears to the correct size... But it is getting increasingly difficult to get Imperial tooling. ME and BA are still fairly common -but for how much longer(?)
The model should also include "expansions" that enable it to be improved on -for instance the speed controller should be easy to swap from a simple PWAM to a complex R/C with regen.
regards
ralph
So now you know.
There are a few points I should make clear about this competition, since it appears there may be some misunderstanding.
Firstly, it is a privately organised competition and NOT a Gauge 3 Society "official" competition.
It is, however, intended to benefit the Society by providing a set of simple designs which the Society may use as its own to promote G3.
Secondly, the intention is to use these designs as the basis of a "G3 Made Simple" ongoing campaign for which www.G3MadeSimple.org.uk has been registered.
Designs will be added to this project as they are donated to the Society or when submitted as entries to future competitions.
Thirdly, although this is not an "official" Society competition, the draft rules were submitted to the Committee for comments/suggestions and the only response came from Ian Turner (Chairman) who stated, <quote>They seem reasonable to me too John.</quote>
Ian is on holiday at present, which is the reason he has not yet responded to this discussion.
The "format" of the entry submissions (the Sections under which the stages of construction are to be recorded) was designed around a set of suggestions provided by Ralph ("Cabbage") and he has no arguments over that aspect.
The draft of that part was sent to Ralph, who commented, <quote>There is nothing there that I can find fault with. On a personal note it could do with making a little more friendlier...
At the moment it reads more like an insurance claims document than the light hearted game rules for a fun thing to do(!)
</quote>
The disagreement revolves around whether or not the Society should "own" the designs.
I shall be away next week so will not be responding to messages over that period.
I have to say, that had I known that this competition would lead to so much aggravation, I would not have bothered!
Regards,
John.
Gent,
I fully concure with the comments made by Peter and can understand why Ralph has got a little upset. Though the idea of a competition to encourage the membership to get involved is a good one, I fail to understand why the G3 Society should "own" the design, unless it was the intent to turn it into a commercial operation and sell the results as a kit of parts to the general public.
But my understanding is that we are just looking for ideas for a simple locomotive that can be constructed cheaply from commercially available parts and materials with hand tools (and drill) so that railway modellers (not model engineers) in other scales can have a go at Gauge 3. So surely the best way to "spread the word" to the outside world would be to allow those taking part to publicise their ideas in what ever way see fit. I was originally looking into having a go at a small L&Y engine and if this came to fruition I would certainly want to also write about my efforts in the L&Y Society house magazine and maybe even the general railway modelling press. So if I do decide to proceed with this engine I will not now be entering the competition.
Another fact that would exclude me is that I believe modellers in other scales (myself included) would be more comfortable with commercial parts they know - and as stated in an earlier posting, the motor/gearbox & wheels I would wish to use will alone break the cost Limit. Maybe it would have been better to have set a lower cost limit and excluded the motor/gearbox and wheel to give builders the choice (as per most kits in the smaller scales).
Regards,
Derek.
The intention would not be to make a profit from the designs which would be freely distributed.
The reason for the Society to "own" the designs would be so that it alone could use the material in targeted campaigns to promote itself as well as G3 generally.
If the designs were available from practically any source, they would have little or no value to the Society since the focus would shift away from the Society and any "G3 Made Simple" promotions would be considerably diluted....typical reaction may be, "Nothing new here, I've seen all this before!"
The idea is that the final material is broken down into easy to follow components so that practically anyone without previous experience could build the model....hence the rather convoluted format of the entry requirements.
Regards,
John.
Hello All
Just to say I think Derek makes a very good point with the comment ( please exclude wheels gears and motor ) Please don't give up on the idea .
John
[Deep Breath]....
QUOTE:
The intention would not be to make a profit from the designs which would be freely distributed.
UNQUOTE:
See Above for GNU General Public Licence ver 2.0.
QUOTE:
The reason for the Society to "own" the designs would be so that it alone could use the material in targeted campaigns to promote itself as well as G3 generally.
UNQUOTE:
I think you would find that the Members of the Society are its best advertisement. The control of the source material in this regards from both a commercial and advertising point of view I find to be incorrect in both approach and manner. The company I worked for before I retired never advertised. If you were in that market place -you knew who we were. I was more aware of "Das Spur II Gruppe" than I was of the Gauge '3' Society until recently. It was Robin Saxton who first introduced me to Gauge '3' at the AGM of the 16mmNGM at Stonely. This is not a commercial scale -this is not a commercial market, the retailers will tell you that. When IanT was exploring what were the specific marketing things about Gauge 3 he was forced to admit that the '3' was the only thing that was "special". You tried changing the colour schemes and all that happened was we lost the Latin motto (as my son said -"If no one can understand what it says -why do you have it?")
I come from the "Bleeding Edge" of commerce. I understand marketing to a degree that you cannot. The machines that I designed were about £8million per cubic metre, the pressure for companies to get their equipment into my designs was mega...
QUOTE:
If the designs were available from practically any source, they would have little or no value to the Society since the focus would shift away from the Society and any "G3 Made Simple" promotions would be considerably diluted....typical reaction may be, "Nothing new here, I've seen all this before!"
UNQUOTE:
Wrong. Completely and Utterly Wrong. The Gauge '3' Society, The National 2.5inch Gauge Association, and Das Spur II Gruppe are the ONLY places on the entire planet you can go to for information about this scale and gauge. That places the "market resource" at a level of tactical advantage. I do not know how many of the readers of this thread can (like me), speak, read and lipread fluent German -but I don't think it will be that many.... (Yes that is the reason I still use the schoolboy nickname given to me when I came to England of "Cabbage" -"Ich bin ein Kraut"). So that brings the English speaking down to two only. You throw as much information as you can onto the Web. There are people out there looking for the Gauge '3' Society and its followers. I get 170+ "hits' on the section of my website that deals with how to make G3 track per month. That is almost as many people per month as there are in the G3S itself. People are looking, if they cannot find the information easily to hand -they will look elsewhere. We are a niche market at best -there is so very little information out there that trying to control it and restrict it to "targeted marketing" is I believe counter productive.
QUOTE:
The idea is that the final material is broken down into easy to follow components so that practically anyone without previous experience could build the model....hence the rather convoluted format of the entry requirements.
UNQUOTE:
Yes I agree with what you have written -the format of it however is wrong. You are used to producing long legal documents -not text books. Thus the format is more applicable to producing legal texts rather than text books. The format you have given can be "worked around" -and that is why I wrote you the Exemplar. The first test instruction manual I had to write as a student teacher was; "How to get drunk in a Bar", (think about it -it is not that simple!).
You submitted your document to a "Review by Peers", which is good, but you only got ONE reply -which is bad...
Speaking as the former Head Of Design -I would say that "Your project has crashed". My instructions to you as an employee would be: stop now, rejig it after taking advice, do a "blind test" using three other members on this thread to see what they feel about the new version, THEN submit it back to the Committee. If you still get only the one reply -scrap it.
regards
ralph
Chaps.
From where I sit reading all of these posts we have total support for the competition. John has clearly put a lot of effort into this and generously donated a superb and relevant prize (I have one and it is really lovely).
Since the committee apparently agreed with the terms can we perhaps await their responces? Maybe joint ownership of the design, or some sort of licencing would satisfy all - but what did/does our committee think when they agreed the terms?
Ted? Richard? Roger? Ian(s)?
Mike
I haven't had the opportunity to discuss this subject in depth with other committee members, but will do so as soon as we can convene in sufficient numbers.
It seems that only approximately one quarter of the G3 Society members look at the web site regularly. Therefore I believe that the correct place to announce a competition would be in the next Newsletter, after full agreement on the above points.
Ted
QuoteThe Ruston 48DS is one of Richard Thompson's projects.
I've only just read this thread ( been away for a while) Yes it's one of mine, I think I've got a couple of kits left from the first batch - £140 complete, other than wheels - (£50 ish from Walsall) and motor gearbox assy (£35 ish from Roxey Mouldings )
Regards
Richard
Well it seems that my wife is right -my mother did train me well!!!
I seem to be the only one that has beaten the £140 barrier -if only by a few pennies... If you examine the costings in the Exemplar then you will see that the four wheels and axles at £28 are the highest cost single item on the "shopping list". The biggest problem with scratch building has always been the wheels. I think that the £140 barrier is still workable -but a good case could be made for a bodyshell without wheels and motor... Ironically if the model were constructed to level 3, (ie with the use of a lathe), I could build it cheaper(!)
The question that is now "bugging me" is "Can I design a steam locomotive within the £140 barrier?"
A "Climax A" would be possible design -but there were no Climaxs in the UK. This leaves "Yahs" the infamous occupant of "The Peacock Iron Foundry of Bilston Staffs"... Alternatively there is the design from Hunslet which is more "Heisler" in style....
Time for some thinking -with the aid of a little 12 year old Malt.
regards
ralph
Hi Ralph
Although there was not a climax on uk soil there was infact a 2 truck T boilered Shay on an industrial line the name of which escapes me.
Mark
Yes -it was at the Peacock Iron Works...
I have been thinking with the aid of a little "lubrication" last night(!)
A possible model of a Sentinel Y10 might be adapted from parts from a Mamod -no SERIOUSLY!!!
This is the idea:
I use two Mamod ends with a Mamod boiler between them. I then take the steam from the boiler
and drive a USE kit 1 engine to worms on the axles. This will multiply the torque from the single
cylinder to a usable amount. Can it be done under the £140 limit -no... But I think that for around £300
it might be possible to have something chugging around the tracks.
These are my costings so far:
Supplier £ Rqd £ £
PPS steam
cab back 8 2 16
cab front 12 2 24
cab roof 4 2 8
std boiler 25 1 25
adjustable safety valve 8 1 8
water sight glass and O ring 3 1 3
back water level brass plate 5 1 5
combustion chamber 10 1 10
fwd/rev valve 15 1 15
steam regulator 23 1 23
meths burner 26 1 26 163
Forest classics
USE kit 1 33 1 33 33
Technobots
std MOD 1 worm gear 0.81 2 1.62
MFA 40T plastic gear 0.70 2 1.40
s/steel bar 4mm 1.07 1 1.07
K&S 64 thous 1 inch 7.19 2 14.38
4mm bearings 1.19 8 9.52 27.99
Muffet gears
45 tooth MOD1 spur gear 0.57 2 1.14 1.14
Brandbright
47mm coach wheels 14 2 28 28
£253.13p
regards
ralph
I've been away this week (West Highland Railways – good weather, lovely scenery, very enjoyable) so have not been around to comment some of this thread, either in my role of Moderator or Chairman. The most important point in my view is that John put this competition together on his own initiative and kindly offered a very good and valuable prize (which he is funding). Simply on that basis, I think he has every right to decide on the terms of entry.
As stated, John distributed the written terms of the competition to the Committee and I saw no objection to them. The copyright conditions were clearly set out and are unambiguous. I see no reason to change them. It may well be that some Members will find these terms unacceptable and decide not to enter the competition. That is their right but it would also be a great pity.
Let's examine in more detail some of the issues behind this....
First, I hope I do not need to point out that the Society is a not-for-profit organisation. We are not a commercial operation and indeed, have no desire to become one. We should be "businesslike" (professional, efficient, solvent) but we are not a business. In fact our main remit is simply stated on the back of every Newsletter;
"Our aim is to encourage interest and participation in the building and running of scenic Gauge '3' model railways. ..."
My view is that this competition actively supports that aim. The fact that John has (correctly in my view) asked for Society copyright, makes life much simpler for the Committee, in terms of making these designs available to a wider audience (without fear of legal complications) by any means we might see fit (Online, Society Publications, Railways Magazines etc). We will, of course, always fully acknowledge the author/source of any particular design.
As our aim is to "encourage interest and participation {in} Gauge 3" I also think it extremely unlikely that we would ever refuse the use and publication of one of these G3 designs elsewhere, although there may be circumstances where we might. I really can't think of any but it seems sensible to reserve the right to do so.
Should the designer later wish to use his design commercially, I doubt we would object to that either, in fact I'm sure we would welcome professionally made G3 engines. Nor would we normally seek any financial gain or advantage from any such arrangement. Our primary reason (in practice) to ask for copyright is to give the Society the freedom to use any design submitted without constant reference back to the designer (or their heirs should this be required one day).
If anyone isn't happy with the terms of the competition, then don't enter it. You will still be most welcome to exhibit your design at the AGM but you will not win the nice prize.
You have to be "In It to Win It"!
So there you have it. In my view, a good, useful competition, with an excellent prize, that can only benefit Gauge '3' whilst also providing the Society with some useful intellectual property. Please approach the competition in the spirit that was intended and I'm sure we will see some interesting and innovative G3 designs come next February's AGM.
Regards,
IanT
I have returned from a week in Sussex and see that this thread has now gone quiet.
The offer of the prize and competition is still "on the table" and I hope that some of you will take up the challenge, even though you may not be in total agreement with the rules.
So far only one judge has been appointed but it has been suggested that the editor of a model railway magazine (particularly one with a large-scale/ garden bias) should be invited to participate.
The object of the exercise is not to produce the best model per se but to produce a set of instructions to enable a beginner to produce a locomotive.
So, don't be deterred if you feel your finished model will not be up to exhibition standards...that should not affect your chances of winning.
What is important is that the instructions are logical and easy to follow and someone with few tools and a small budget can use them to produce a working model.
Regards,
John.