DTG Class 442 Wessex

pjt1974 · Post by **pjt1974** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:35 pm

Whatever they are, I'm sure the disks would break the first time the driver tried to use them. Put them both together 'Brake Discs' now we have a recipe to stop

47522 · Post by **47522** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:15 pm

749006 wrote:
47522 wrote:Looks good!

I hope they tone down the headlight and add the break discs!
What is a "break discs" or do you mean the Brake Disks on the wheel sets?

They will look strange without them.

Whoops... I did mean 'brake.' That'll teach me for quickly replying during the last 30 seconds of my lunch 'break!'

And for the record... Starting work at 3:30 in the morning calls for some pretty weird breaks!

Back to topic...

atlasduff47 · Post by **atlasduff47** » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:19 pm

atlasduff47 wrote:
749006 wrote:
47522 wrote:Looks good!

I hope they tone down the headlight and add the break discs!
What is a "break discs" or do you mean the Brake Disks on the wheel sets?

They will look strange without them.
Not sure you read the post on which you comment correctly!

I was referring to the grammar, and missed the incorrect spelling

Apologies!

Juanillo99 · Post by **Juanillo99** » Tue May 12, 2015 10:43 am

niclouse3 · Post by **niclouse3** » Tue May 12, 2015 10:50 am

Oh, very nice indeed.

Nick

nukem · Post by **nukem** » Tue May 12, 2015 12:45 pm

I know it's only a work in progress shot but shame they haven't got the formation of the train correct, the motor coach and guards van should be in the middle of the 5 car formation in both those shots it's the 4th coach back, I do hope this isn't the case when it is released. A simple thing that could spoil an otherwise impressive model, enough of the negative I am looking forward to this unit like many others it does look like a lot of effort has gone in to it lets hope it is one of DTG best releases yet

gptech · Post by **gptech** » Tue May 12, 2015 2:09 pm

The formation of the stock is down to the scenario writer, not the modeller so it's a bit harsh to pass that critique on it.

phat2003uk · Post by **phat2003uk** » Tue May 12, 2015 2:11 pm

I think it's fair to assume that when 'nukem' refers to the 'model', he means the product as a whole. I'm sure he's well aware the consist isn't decided by the modeller. Unless the modeller creates the Quick Drive consists of course

.

nukem · Post by **nukem** » Tue May 12, 2015 2:29 pm

gptech wrote:The formation of the stock is down to the scenario writer, not the modeller so it's a bit harsh to pass that critique on it.

I didn't mean it in a harsh context at all and I am sorry that it was read that way. I'm sure that consists was just put together to show off the units progress in the sim and to develop "hype" which tbh isn't really necessary as anyone that owns the L2B (or even PDL) will be screaming for this, it was just an observation to which I did say that I knew it was a work in progress shot when I commented and I never said at any pointthat it was the modeller.

atlasduff47 · Post by **atlasduff47** » Tue May 12, 2015 2:57 pm

Now, although I am not a unit fan, I really like the look of this

k3v1n989a813 · Post by **k3v1n989a813** » Tue May 12, 2015 7:09 pm

Sorry for my criticisms, but I heard somewhere that the excuse for only releasing 1 livery for £11.99 is because of the poll that was held a few month ago showing that the majority want trains with their logos on it. What I do understand is that they have some licensing issues especially with Southwest Trains or Virgin. What I don't understand is the lack of the NSE livery. Paying £11.99 for one livery and paying 3 more quid just to get a slightly modified model with a different skin seems a bit cheeky to me. Now, I know they might release it at a cheaper price like £7.99, but as we can see with the one livery 4EPB, that is not the case. Now, I would like to apologise for my criticisms, I do not want anyone to scream at me saying "HATER" because I dislike DTG's policies. I would make it clear that I am not judging the quality of the product, in fact I would probably pick this up if it's on a sale.

rfletcher72 · Post by **rfletcher72** » Tue May 12, 2015 7:29 pm

k3v1n989a813 wrote:What I don't understand is the lack of the NSE livery.

Happen one might be along in due course

,

k3v1n989a813 · Post by **k3v1n989a813** » Tue May 12, 2015 7:43 pm

rfletcher72 wrote:
k3v1n989a813 wrote:What I don't understand is the lack of the NSE livery.
Happen one might be along in due course ,

I know what you're hinting

749006 · Post by **749006** » Tue May 12, 2015 7:57 pm

gptech wrote:The formation of the stock is down to the scenario writer, not the modeller so it's a bit harsh to pass that critique on it.

But when you drive the unit in a scenario you should not have to correct the formation of the unit before driving.
It may well be that WIP means it's just a test shot and they 'should' get it right before release.

Fincra5 · Post by **Fincra5** » Tue May 12, 2015 8:46 pm

Juanillo99 wrote:
CEzFPVhWIAA8iPz.jpg

10955290_10152847935743091_3105807288852872289_o.jpg

What on earth is that consist they have created, the Guards Van should be in the middle of of the 5 cars!

Atomic Systems

DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex

Re: DTG Class 442 Wessex