"Certification" guidelines discussion

"Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby rdikken » Tue Oct 06, 2015 6:43 am

I find it more positive to provide a tag for correct cars, such as:

"Approved by TT Nut"

I would call a quality label.

Where is the big boss? Is n't this a good idea?

Rob
rdikken
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:10 pm
Location: Smilde, The Netherlands

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby rdikken » Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:33 am

Dear US TT fans,

This is not a joke!

Appoint some wise TT-Nut members as approval specialists. Make some guidelines for approval. Create a nice easy to print quality sign with a unique random number, something not easy to copy. Assign to this number some data, so you can see historically who approved it, approval date, product data, keep it in a open database and the manufacturer should provide this tag on the box.

After 3 till 5 years every US TT manufacturer will want this tag because it will be a unique selling point. End of discussion and we will improve our models.

In Holland we call this "the egg of Columbus". (But I am not so sure if you can translate it like this.)

Please react my friends.
rdikken
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:10 pm
Location: Smilde, The Netherlands

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:18 pm

Actually that's not a bad idea at all...
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby ConducTTor » Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:48 pm

rdikken wrote:I find it more positive to provide a tag for correct cars, such as:

"Approved by TT Nut"

I would call a quality label.

Where is the big boss? Is n't this a good idea?

Rob


I think this is really good. We would have to decide what criteria has to be met for a model to get the label. We would also have to decide on who is qualified to give out such a label (I don't believe I am). Perhaps jp and Marquette to start with.....
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby j p » Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:42 pm

I think this is really good. We would have to decide what criteria has to be met for a model to get the label. We would also have to decide on who is qualified to give out such a label (I don't believe I am). Perhaps jp and Marquette to start with.....[/quote]

It is an excellent idea and I think that it has to be a team work.
TT West Richard is much more qualified than me for this, especially in terms of prototypical correctness. Marquette would be a good choice if she is willing to help with this.
I can help with the technical aspects - evaluating paint, detail level, pad print, decals, etc. I have a Mechanical Engineering background and I work with decoration of surfaces on consumer products.
Sometimes I get grumpy on the board, sorry for that.
I have another idea, related to this: what about some sort of guidelines for the manufacturers? Can we write down a list of "traps" and preferred solutions to known problems? Then the manufacturers would have a chance to avoid many of those problems. It is much cheaper to correct errors in the design phase than after introducing the product to the market. Less errors at no additional cost mean more happy customers, better sales and happy manufacturers.

Jan
j p
 
Posts: 1200
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Tue Oct 06, 2015 3:12 pm

Yes - I'd definitely be up for helping with this in whatever ways I can (which likely would be in prototype correctness-related things).
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby rdikken » Tue Oct 06, 2015 4:38 pm

May I do 2 suggestions:

1) Take a 3-member committee, so you do not have even votes

2) Now something technical and please remember you do not need to follow up:
Assign a certain code, like the following:

ABC01.06 where ABC is standing for a model like the SW1200, you have 17576 possibilities, if you keep it
to capitals
01 is the version like the Conrail 9359
.06 is weighted qualifier in this case six, which would be moderate. Models with a qualifier below 5 should not
get an approval.

This qualifier can be a weighted average based on 2 categories of qualifiers. Again an example to understand
what I mean:
Model based qualifiers, like
- dimensions, 1 till 10
- height of coupling, 1 till 10
- track behaviour, 1 till 10
- feel and looks, 1 till 10
Version based qualifiers
- correctness of the paint, 1 till 10
- correctness of the livery, 1 till 10

The model based qualifiers are weighing double, because they are not easy to correct.

Take again the SW1200 Conrail number 9359:
dimensions: 6
height of coupling: 4
track behaviour: 7
feel and looks: 8
Average: 6,25
paint: 5
livery: 5
Average: 5

End qualifier: (2 * 6,25 + 5) / 3 = 6

The SW1200 Conrail 9359 with the approval code ABC01.06, is not the best of the range. And this can easily be seen because for an example the South Pacific SW1200 has the same model code ABC with the same model based qualifiers, of course a different model number, let's say 02, but the qualifier is 7.

These are just examples. I will now keep out of the discussion.

Lat but not least: try to keep it simple!

Ciao,
Rob
rdikken
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:10 pm
Location: Smilde, The Netherlands

Re: Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby ConducTTor » Tue Oct 06, 2015 5:14 pm

For this to work/be fair, every parameter being checked has to be objective. The test should be repeatable by anyone, anywhere.

I need to put some more thought into it before I comment on specifics.
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby rdikken » Tue Oct 06, 2015 6:10 pm

A dimension is something hard, it is 1:120 within certain limits or not. The height of a coupling is hard. Feel and looks is not. But if you have 3 members with three different rates, the average is more than an indication. And not everything should be hard.

But again, these are just thoughts.

So, Now I will keep out of it. And of course I will send my cars for a certification.

Rob.
rdikken
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:10 pm
Location: Smilde, The Netherlands

Re: Re: "Certification" guidelines discussion

Postby Marquette » Tue Oct 06, 2015 6:34 pm

Paint - in terms of colour - can be very subjective. Lettering accuracy, however, is a fairly concrete exercise: how well does the model's lettering and marking match the available photos?
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests