No announcement yet.

Wrong headcodes - again

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wrong headcodes - again

    Really disappointed to see that, as with the 00 gauge Class 73, Dapol has completely messed up the Class 121 headcodes, again using completely the wrong typeface for the type of unit.

    What's even more frustrating is that, some time back, I offered to send Dapol hi-res scans of genuine BR two-and-four character headcode blinds - for nothing - so the company can get it right. Joel replied and suggested I contact Neil. So I did. Neil didn't even have the courtesy to reply.

    Last edited by Finsbury Park; 16 February 2018, 15:15.

  • #2
    Finsbury Park Hi, You may not have seen my PM to you since I've not had a reply?
    I spoke with Neil and it seems your email has gone astray,. Perhaps you could contact me directly or state the correct font for these head codes? That way we can look into the issue and if need be correct it.

    Dapol Staff Member


    • Finsbury Park
      Finsbury Park commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks for your reply, Andy. The reason I didn't see your reply so far was, alas, the business of real life getting in the way of railway modellling.

      There is no 'correct font' in the commercially-available sense for BR two and four character headcodes, because it was a unique, bespoke design for BR. It has never been commercially available as a typeface. Alas, with your Class 73s and 121s, you have seemed to use a commercially-available approximation, which have both been glaringly incorrect.

      It's all the more frustrating because, with the class 22 and 52, you have previously got the style much closer to correct than you did with the Class 121 and 73 (pre-privatisation SR two-character panels used a smaller version of the standard four character style, albeit with a slightly different character set) and you DID research the headcodes for the green Class 122s and got that style (which was unique to first generation DMMUs with two-character headcodes) more-or-less spot on.

      So I do find it bizarre - with Dapol previously producing the Class 22 and 52 - that the style of headcode characters used with the class 73 is plain wrong.

      The style you have used with the 121 is similarly incorrect, yet strangely very similar to the post-privatisation style seen on many SR units and locos, which was (a) both more condensed than the standard BR style, (b) uses a completely different style of character and (c) post-dated the use of four-character headcode panels by 20 years.

      I just hope it's not too late to get this right on the next batch of Class 73s and the Class 29s?

      As I've said, I can supply scans of real headcode blinds for BR two-and four-character panels and also the post-privatisation two-character style (note that either this or the BR style would be correct for the GB Railfreight-liveried Class 73s, although reference to prototye pictures is advised, as both styles have been used. The South West Trains and Southern-liveries Class 73s have only ever seemed to run with double white blanks up)
      Last edited by Finsbury Park; 4 March 2018, 11:06.

  • #3
    Finsbury Park Hi, Thanks for your further comments. I would never take a position that anything is ever 'set in stone' and I am keen to accept your offer of providing the information you previously stated that you have. Sharing this along with provenance that it was from the relevant locomotive type(s) and operation depots etc. would be a welcome positive move and a great help in illustrating the errors you mention. Its difficult to draw conclusion about the 'correct' typefaces from the information you've so far provided.

    Since I am currently working on this in anticipation of future releases, I need to commit my artwork to the production process shortly and unfortunately, at least some illustrated examples from your collection, the typeface we originated for these models (based on our own research and examples kindly provided by others) is what we have. We're satisfied that the typeface we created for this model is as close as possible to those used on the prototype and subsequent positive feedback from customers corroborates this. However, there is still time to change this should you wish to assist.

    Dapol Staff Member