This year's wagon competition

[Michael Osborne]

With the forthcoming S7 wagon competition coming up is it now the time to look at the rules. Having been the only entrant last year in the scratch building category would it be better if there was a minimum number of entries before any awards were given out. I took little pleasure in winning a one horse race.
Perhaps with having such small number of members should we be having competitions at all.

 

[Marc Dobson]

I think this is why there is now only the once category for this year's cometition. I was going to enter last years competition but the boss didn't allow me time off. But if it is any consolidation you would have still beeten me anyway.

Going back to the category question if my memory is correct a discussion was had this time last year as to what fitted into what box. before the advent of Home 3D printing it was pritty clear any kit or ready to run modified was on one box and scratch built was in the other. with the rise of 3D printing and the ability to make one off wagons etc now available this can muddy the waters so to speak as it could be said that if you have produced your own drawings, STL file and then printed it yourself and its a one off then this would be the same a scratch building. 2 or more off's then that falls into the kits catagory.

 

[Eastsidepilot]

With the forthcoming S7 wagon competition coming up is it now the time to look at the rules. Having been the only entrant last year in the scratch building category would it be better if there was a minimum number of entries before any awards were given out. I took little pleasure in winning a one horse race.
Perhaps with having such small number of members should we be having competitions at all.

The fact that only about 8-10% of the membership attends the AGM will affect entry numbers, and judging by my visits to the AGM it is normally the same rogues that turn up anyway. It's appreciated that not all have the desire or ability to travel to it either, so maybe we have to take another look at how competitions are organised at least, perhaps via on line means as the Guild did.
As for you, Mike, being the only entrant last time in the scratch built section take it as recognition of your excellent modelling skills, so still well deserved mate.

Col.

 

[Eastsidepilot]

. with the rise of 3D printing and the ability to make one off wagons etc now available this can muddy the waters so to speak ....

Perhaps two categories, analogue and digital ?

 

[Marc Dobson]

How about :

1. Kit built/RTR modified
2. Self designed and made.one off.

 

[Ian@StEnochs]

Kenneth and I were a couple of those 'rogues' who attended the agm before lockdown despite the 700 mile round trip. However the availability of Zoom has saved us a couple of overnight stays and a long, and expensive, train journey.
To our shame we never brought anything for the competition. Perhaps as the agm is online an online competition would garner more support.
And yes, digital and analogue categories. 3D cad and printing are completly dfferent skills from traditional model making and it would be like comparing apples and oranges.
Ian.

 

[Marc Dobson]

Are we then looking at three categories looking forward. To next year's competition?

1. Kit built/RTR modified
2. Scratch built one off (none digital)
3. CAD/CAM self designed and produced.

This would recognise that there are different skills being used.
If the rules also allowed submissions remotely from the AGM then speaking for myself I would have been able to have submitted something as it was I was unable to get to the AGM physically but I was on the zoom call.

 

[Dog Star]

3D cad and printing are completly dfferent skills from traditional model making and it would be like comparing apples and oranges.

I do not agree with Ian's comment above for the correct and accurate use of digital technology to assist in the production of parts - be that 3DP or etching or CAM - is now part of the processes used by businesses and by individuals. To exclude entries which involve such work, because the group cannot see how to include such models in any competition is a poor reflection on the group ethos of accurate models by pushing boundaries.

If the committee feels the need to review categories for the competition... and the rules to support the different categories, then members of the committee may wish to consider a collaborative venture that is under way at this time. There are six members of the S7 Group (no names etc.) who are working together to produce an accurate model of a particular wagon prototype... each person is contributing to the outcome in whatever way they can, for example:-

1/ research, rather like a "what/why/when" discussion, including analysis of the relevant historical documents;

2/ preparation of 2D drawings for phototools to permit of an etched wagon underframe;

3/ preparation of 3D drawings for 3DP of the sides/ends/floor of the wagon body;

4/ hand creation of jigs and fixtures to produce parts and ease assembly.

Whilst assembly of the body and of the underframe are "simplified" and "aided" by use of slots/tabs/dowels there are traditional skills required for fit and function particularly for some of the jigs.

Each member contributes and each member recieves parts... so which competition category shall be appropriate for their models?

regards, Graham

 

[Malcolm Trevena]

Why not have a single " wagon " competition to encourage people to enter which encompasses all categories.
And a " non passenger stock " competition for the other cup.
Let's not get bogged down by trying to cover every eventuality.
Malcolm

 

[Tim Humphreys ex Mudhen]

Thanks everyone for some very interesting thoughts and suggestions on the future of the competition. i will ensure that this is taken to the first full committee meeting after the AGM.

all the best
Tim

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

Interesting discussion - although it does rather appear to be getting heavily bogged down with the minutiae.

As an outsider looking in I sought out how the NMRA approaches competitions and being a non-S7 member you can call me all the names under the sun as this would appear to be none of my business .

Basically the NMRA have two categories scratch built and kit built viz:

"a. Scratch Built - This class is intended for models built largely from basic or scratch materials."

"b. Kit Built - This classification is intended for models comprised of more than 50% kit or largely commercial parts to allow them to compete with similarly built models rather than typically higher scoring scratch built models."

NMRA judging is based around five areas:
Construction - focusing on the quality of workmanship.
Detail - how many parts and complexity.
Conformity - how well does the model reproduce the prototype?
Finish and Lettering - complexity of finish and lettering and the quality of skill of it's application.
Scratchbuilding - how much was scratchbuilt.

As I see it only two categories would be required. Scratch Built - as it's title implies; and Kit Built - which would naturally include kits (where 50% or more of it is used) and modified RTR. The skill is in the judging

The entry would be supported by a brief description by the entrant outling their approach including whether the entry was professionally painted and lettered.

To end, in my view 3D printed models would be classed as kit built as you are starting with a 'finished' product and still have to add wheels, couplers, paint finish, decals and other detail parts where necessary.

 

[Dog Star]

Dave,

Your opinion is as vaild as any other member of WT, thank you for your comments about NMRA competitions. If I understand the NMRA rules, a 3DP model which is composed of more than one part, can be considered as "scratch" built because the model is made from basic materials - I like this idea.

regards, Graham

 

[Eastsidepilot]

Are we then looking at three categories looking forward. To next year's competition?

That'll mean getting a saucer for the cup and plate !

 

[Malcolmcelyn]

That'll mean getting a saucer for the cup and plate !

Groan!

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

If I understand the NMRA rules, a 3DP model which is composed of more than one part, can be considered as "scratch" built because the model is made from basic materials - I like this idea.

Hi Graham

If I may, I'd like to throw in a good old chunky spanner here.

My understanding of 'scratch material' is one which exists as a 'solid' raw material such as wood, metal, plastic, etc from which one can fabricate parts. In my view the liquid resin used in 3D printers would not be considered as a 'solid' raw material since (i) as daft as it sounds you could not fabricate a part from it in it's supplied state and (ii) it requires a chemical reaction (exposure to UV light) to cure it.

Therefore my interpretation would be the 3D printed model parts you've described in your post #28 would not be deemed as 'scratch material' since they were/will be produced by a machine and become 'off the shelf' so to speak. Put the right combination of these together and you have a kit.

Added to which, my understanding would be that any research, design, drawing, etc using CAD to produce templates, programs and moulds to subsequently manufacture parts by a machine (3D printer, injection moulding, etching) will be the same whether they are detail parts, body/chassis parts, a full kit or a RTR model.

Apologies for the heayweight spanner.......................and the potential headache for the S7 committee determining the rules/guidance.

Regards, David

 

[simond]

If I can chuck a 10BA open ender to follow Dave’s chunky spanner, presumably the same distinction would be necessary if CNC machine tools are used to extract components from the aforementioned solid material.

I have no skin in this game, but would venture to suggest that a digitally-produced model (or kit of components) is not the same skillset as taking drawings (how so ever produced) and making components by hand (with or without machine tools).

Perhaps this distinction is a rational difference between a cup & a plate?

atb
Simon

 

[Ian@StEnochs]

If I can chuck a 10BA open ender to follow Dave’s chunky spanner, presumably the same distinction would be necessary if CNC machine tools are used to extract components from the aforementioned solid material.

I have no skin in this game, but would venture to suggest that a digitally-produced model (or kit of components) is not the same skillset as taking drawings (how so ever produced) and making components by hand (with or without machine tools).

Perhaps this distinction is a rational difference between a cup & a plate?

atb
Simon

SImon,
Totaly agree. You reinforce what I said in #26.
Ian.

 

[daifly]

The Committee spent a lot of time discussing the points raised above and couldn't reach a decision one way or the other! That's why, for this year, there's a single class where each builder will be asked to provide full details of bought and made parts etc. for each wagon which can then be judged on all of its merits.
Hopefully, we can be guided by members on how they would like the competition classes to be defined for the future.
Dave

 

[Marc Dobson]

So we are back to my post #27. For this year the rules have been set. And as Tim and Dave have said any idea will be passed back to the committee. So we are talking about the 2024 competition.

 

[Ian G]

I know many that cannot scratch build or even build a kit but can draw. would it be prudent for future to have a model created by 3D printer as well as using a laser cutter, I use autoCAD every day but find it easy to scratch build.

Ian G