Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Good

About islandbridgejct

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. islandbridgejct


    I think the wooden sides and ends were on the 20t van. The 30 tonner had steel sides and ends. The SSM model is of the 30t.
  2. islandbridgejct

    Murphy Models Craven coaches white stripes

    The diners were generally classed as buffets and converted from the CIE design based on the Bredins that preceded the laminate stock, so dating to 1950-56, rather than 1955 and post. (That's assuming I know what I'm talking about. I think there was a CIE design derived from the Bredins; but feel free to jump in and correct me.) They were numbered 2402-2422. 2402 was a diner. 2403 was a kitchen car. 2412 and 2416 were cafeteria cars. The rest were buffets. 2419-2422 ran on commonwealth bogies, the rest were on B4s by 1980. If I can get my scanner working, I'll post some pictures. I remember one Good Friday about 1980 getting on a midday Connolly-Dundalk train that was running with a van, open and buffet, instead of the regular van + 4 or 5, because most of the regular stock had been swiped for long distance trains. Conditions were tight.... Alan
  3. islandbridgejct

    Murphy Models Craven coaches white stripes

    My 3rd edition of Doyle and Hirsch says 1149-1151 were converted from super standard to standard in 1985, so 2 years before Irish Rail was created and the 2nd stripe introduced. They became 1558, 1548 and 1547. It lists them as introduced in 1970, so I think they reverted back to their original numbers which were missing from the main series of Cravens standards. So it looks like you have a 15 year window to run it as a 1st. I can't see anything about 1508-9, sorry. Alan
  4. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Thanks guys. I use an engineer's scriber which seems to have a better point than the dividers I use to mark out the parallel lines (check 1). I do a starter hole with a 0.4mm drill (check 2). And I've tried the pin chuck as well as the archimedes with, I thought, less success, probably because it tends to wander while I'm turning it (check 3). Maybe I don't have the hole deep enough before I start drilling. Maybe I should just admit that I'm not very good at this. Maybe I should just try harder. At least I can see the hole is off centre. I suppose that's a start. Thanks for the suggestions. Alan
  5. islandbridgejct

    class 121

    Very nice. I love the weathering. You got the single brake cylinder I see. Now all you need is a set of buffers for it to run into.
  6. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Thanks Andy. Do you know, I actually have one of those and one of the last things I did the last time I was modelling was to actually smack myself on the head, say D'oh, and get it out. :doh:Then I ran out of time. On an unrelated matter: I've a problem with my drilling. I can mark the place where I want to drill carefully - engineer's square, dividers, inter-cert maths approved method for bisecting an line, everything carefully marked out and centre punched, then set to work with the archimedes drill to avoid the sort of drift you get with the dremel. Then I take the drill out of the hole to examine my handiwork and it has ALWAYS and INEVITABLY moved at least 0.25mm, often more like 0.5mm. It doesn't sound much, but if you're trying to make something to within a few 100ths of a mm tolerance, and people keep telling you it will fall off if you don't, it's a bit of a pain. Has anyone out there got any top tips that don't involve expensive machine tools. Clearly a pillar drill with a proper chuck on the base to hold work would solve the issue, but I don't think I'd get away with setting one up in the study. Not an immediate worry though due to general lack of progress. Alan
  7. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Thanks, Glenderg. I'll see if I can manage a bit of progress over Christmas - probably shut the network down for 2 weeks, put on a replacement bus, then get out the soldering iron. I'll try not to make a habit of it. Alan
  8. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    That's my job interview right there.
  9. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Management of this thread would like to announce that, as part of our new improved customer focused approach to modelling, we will, going forward be actioning new and exciting ways of achieving innovative results for all our stakeholders, and consistently striving to exceed expectations in producing exceptional models to the finest standards. Or, to put it another way, I've been doing F-all. It all began to go off the rails back in January when I ordered some bogies and w-irons from Bill Bedford. Great yokes but there was a delay in delivery from February to July, which didn't matter because work was taking up too much modelling time anyway - no point starting modelling after midnight. I tried knocking up some SSM w-irons, but to be honest I don't really like compensated wagons because they wobble too much. Anyway, I was having trouble getting them square and was a bit puzzled at how to deal with it. By the time I had it cracked, it was summer. August was holidays, and then I came up with my top secret plan to change career to leave more modelling time free, which has resulted of course in less free time for modelling. If they gave out medals for irony.... I'll get the thread back up in due course, but for the moment I'm just reporting that I've nothing worthwhile to report. Move along please, ladies and gentlemen, nothing to see here. Alan
  10. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Thanks John, I had done something similar with the photos, and then scaled them so that the buffer height was 14mm and cross checked against a wheelbase of 38mm. This is what I came up with: It's pretty much confirmed by your calculations. I think it's a bit unlikely that the GSWR moved from a longer wagon to a shorter standard, and a bit more likely that these photos are not the standard. I've noticed that the 1915 standard box van was perpetuated by the GSR and CIE, and it seems to have been 19 to 20 ft in length, so there may have been some false moves towards longer wagons at an earlier stage, but not persisted with, and those are the photos I've got access to. I've some drawings of box vans and opens that work out at between 17' and 20', and there is no reason why length should have been critical here. Oh well, back to work on my frames. Alan
  11. islandbridgejct

    gswr 101

    Various underframe problems have kept progress to a minimum over the past few months, but things are beginning to move again. I wonder can anyone help we with a query. Murray on the GSWR says the standard length for GSWR wagons was 14ft (56mm in 4mm scale). He says the GSWR experimented with some 19ft wagons in the early 1900s (76mm) but that the order was not repeated. Earlier in the book, he includes the following photos: These seem to be official photos rather than personal ones, from the 1890s so should be long out of copyright. If anyone thinks differently, please let me know. I've been scaling them and drawing them up, and by my reckoning the butter wagon is 14ft, but the convertible, the cattle and the open are more like 17ft (assuming 3ft in to the middle of the buffers and 9ft 6in as a cross check for the wheelbase.) Also, the cattle wagon builder's photo is dated 1890, but Murray says that from 1877 all cattle wagons had to be covered. Shepherd on the MGWR provides a drawing for a convertible wagon that is 14ft 2in, apparently introduced in 1893, and a 16ft open from 1889. He says covered cattle wagons were introduced from 1899. Photos from the O'Dea collection show withdrawn convertible, covered and cattle wagons, but never straight on. However, they seem to confirm that open cattle wagons were still in use and being withdrawn in the 1950s, and the covered and convertible wagons look shorter than their English equivalents, which would seem to point to the 14ft length. So, should I follow the photographic evidence, and build 17ft stock, or should I take it that the pictured wagons are non-typical and follow the written word - and if so, whose? Suggestions gratefully received...
  12. islandbridgejct

    RPSI and Steam Dreams Tour

    Just passed this set at Portarlington, 10.41. 461 ready to head for Galway. Seems to be running reasonably to time today. The tables were nicely set. (*Hungry on Cork train.*)
  13. islandbridgejct

    derailing Cement bubbles

    Oh, you're on the slippery slope there. Real points also don't have truck tyre sized gaps through the crossing or alongside the check rails. They don't have loose heels. They don't have 18" radius. They're at least 35cm long in 4mm scale, and could be up to 60. Be careful before you go down that road - you could end up 3 years along with b****** all to show for yourself. Ask me how I know. If your points are in gauge and working for you, and your wagons are square, just put some silver paint on the top of the frog, some track colour on the side, and carry on. Alan
  14. Hi Ian, On the gauge question, the P4 Society is pretty good for 21mm stuff, but a steep learning curve that I'm still trying to get up after 3 years of (admittedly fairly desultory) effort. I imagine the EM Gauge Society probably sells relevant parts too, and is easier to work in - Mayner could advise you on it. I feel the look of 21mm gauge is worth the effort - others say life is too short. Good luck, whichever you choose. Alan
  15. islandbridgejct

    New Irish Lines

    Looks fantastic. Can't wait.

Important Information

Terms of Use