Ironroad

The fact is the UK decided to leave the EU. And in fairness to the rest of the member countries there is no way the EU can grant concessions to the UK that only come with membership. The UK cannot have it both ways. So it is what it is, something very divisive and all of us need to come to terms with that.

For what it's worth, the registration number on the model is TZI 205 (Dublin 1966). I doubt that was picked out of the air.

This may be of interest https://www.ebay.com/itm/353399356527?ul_noapp=true

Is this another one https://www.ebay.com/itm/303899449654?ul_noapp=true

That makes a lot of sense and is akin the the concept introduced by the Tramways Act of 1883 which allowed Baronies (forerunners of the County Councils) to underwrite interest on capital and working losses on lines in their districts. In effect local ratepayers got to decide the fate of a line not central government (either directly or indirectly) and this neatly steps around the idea that one place is being disadvantaged at the expense of another. These subsidies were legislated out of existence in 1924 and taken together with various actions over time including the abolition in the 1980's of domestic house rates had the effect of making Dail Eireann a big county council rather than a national government. (we don't need 160 TDs). It would have been more pertinent a few years back to ask whether the County Councils had any relevance than a referendum of the relevance of the Senate. While national strategies are a necessary part of planning infra-structure, local authorities must be properly funded and given proper power to manage their districts according to the wishes of their inhabitants. And funding should not be dolled out by central government, rather some level of funds relative to population size currently raised in each county district should be retained by the councils rather than going directly to the central exchequer. This redistribution does not necessarily entail an increase in overall taxation.

I'm interested

Difficult to advise without knowing the plan. If all that's needed is a flyover, then you can split the gradient between both lines, with one descending and the other rising. This reduces the distance required to get the required clearance and allows for easier grades. However, this is not possible with a flat solid top baseboard You should consider an open frame with the track bed supported on stilts from the framing (in places it may sit directly on the framing) and I would suggest 12mm plywood for the track bed. An open frame has the advantage of being lighter and lot of options for landscaping.

And in a lot of liveries

Absolutely

Very Interesting results; Definitely makes the case for Anhydrous Ammonia Tankers and the vote a CIE guards van augers Well for the forthcoming release from Mayner. Given the choice of locos, 7 diesels versus 2 steamers, the steamers scored 35%. Including a jeep in the choices might have edged the steamers up a lot more, that's really food for thought. And despite the strong support for more modern coaching stock, it should be noted that Park Royals, Laminates, CIE GSV and AEC 2600 rail cars combined secured 40% of the vote. So maybe there is more support for the period 1950 - 1970 than many assume.

Hi Fran, I expressed disappointment because your question implied that a steam locomotive is not even on the horizon. From the point of committing to produce one to delivery realistically takes three years and it's clear that are further out than that. I think the market has changed radically from what it was 20 years and comparing the sales of the Murphy/Bachmann Mogul back then with the current almost immediate sell out of anything Irish is not fair. (incidentally I have four of these locos). And they had the disadvantage that suitable rolling stock for them to pull didn't exist If the interest is in modeling Irish railways, and all that is on offer is diesels then diesels will sell, but it shouldn't be assumed the focus is that narrow. There was crossover period when Diesels and Steam occupied the rails together. We have diesels in liveries that have no suitable RTR rolling stock for them to pull that fit in the crossover period. To my mind there is a very big gap. As has been noted on this forum the most interesting period for Irish railways is probably late '50's to early '70's. Would you consider producing a train set (steam loco and appropriate coaches) that might broaden the appeal for a loco and the rolling stock? Remember Bachmann did exactly that with the Mogul on the US market.

Very very true, well said. The market isn't limited to diesels, there's been virtually nothing else on offer.

I most certainly would, I'm surprised and slightly disappointed you are even asking the question. I suspect more would be purchased by collectors than modelers.

Funny but very true

LOL, keep saying that DJ and it just might happen. That's very encouraging and helpful. Between them. starting with MM and more recently with IRM, they have they have created a market where there really wasn't one previously and having done so assurances that the appetite for their products that has been created will be met is very important, thank you PS so tell us more!!!

Hi DJ, I doubt we will go back to the days of orange and black Hymeks and I have no doubt that more RTR models of Irish locomotives will be produced in the future. I agree that In essence that a market for things Irish has been created by the production of items not previously produced but that is still a very niche and small market. Accordingly there will be long periods between offering from producers and that includes re-runs or entirely new models. I may be completely wrong but we are probably at least five years away from any new offerings of items that have previously been marketed. It takes time for the market to develop sufficient appetite to make it worthwhile for a producer.

I'm in the same boat but not worried. If IRM only got their allocation on Friday so I'd expect it will take till this week for them to arrive in Liverpool.

Hi DJ, the mathematics are not on your side of this debate. A few people with deep pockets bidding against each other for a few no longer in production items on E Bay is not indicative of a market for a re run of these items. As Wrenneire has pointed out the initial production runs were relatively small in the order of 6.000 items but that doesn't mean there were 6.000 customers, at best the likelihood is there were probably less than 3.000 customers because those that did buy them probably brought multiples. For example I bought 9 x 201's, 8 x 071's, 7 x 141's & 7 x 181's. Also consider how many people are serious enough to sign up on this forum, in the scheme of things it's a very small number. It's tempting to believe that because the tooling still exists that re runs are viable, but it is unlikely that there is a market for the the volumes needed to sell re-runs at the sort of price that would be affordable for most of us. Whoever undertook such a venture would have to be content with holding unsold stock filtering off the shelves slowly over many years and there is no return on investment in that. I'm more concerned with where we go from here. With the release of the A class next year all of the most ubiquitous diesel locomotives that ran on Irish rails from the late '50s to the present time will have been produced as RTR models and while that is quite amazing to me, I think there is a dilemma for IRM or any other producer as to where to go next. I say this because if my reading of comments on this forum generally are correct, there are sharp divisions as to preferences for period. That in itself further dilutes the market even more for any possible future offerings. If I were to hazard a guess we are more likely to see offerings of rolling stock rather than locomotive power because they sell in much greater multiples.

Basically correct, however I do not agree that a retailer should put the onus on the foreign mail order customer to ask for the VAT reduction, that should be automatically granted based on the foreign address the goods are being dispatched to. (no argument about VAT liability if delivery is taken at the shop or the possibility of recouping this on exiting the state assuming the facility exists). In fact a registered retailer should see this as a competitive advantage over an unregistered retailer. But it does seem to me that the fact a great many sellers are not open about this is grounds for suspicion.

Thank you, as I said I hadn't checked the limit recently and was going on memory. And you are correct in stating traders are obliged to declare their VAT registration number on invoices but some may not be in compliance. The purpose of displaying the registration number is to give legitimacy to the charging of VAT particularly to other traders who are also registered and can recoup that VAT. However, by law the full VAT inclusive price must be advertised to consumers without necessarily showing a breakdown, and this opens the door to simply declaring a price with no reference to as to whether it contains VAT or not. Accordingly my suggestion is that before ordering from any entity that does not make the basis of their pricing clear, ask whether the price is VAT inclusive. Take a look at the Olivia's Trains website, they are registered for VAT but are not exactly compliant with the concept of zero rating sales to non EU destinations.

Agree, but I don't think it is all doom and gloom. I'm old enough to remember how things were before the customs union. Back then while both Ireland and the UK were in the EU, export sales to another EU country were zero rated for the purposes of VAT. So being pre internet, I used to make mail order purchases from Hattons. (instead of a weekly e-mail they used to send a monthly listing of their offerings probably produced with a typewriter stencil and a Gestetner duplicating machine). I never had the experience of having any of these parcels stopped and assessed for Irish VAT. I'll grant that the Revenue and PO are now much more sophisticated and it is unlikely mail imports would now escape the net. But keep in mind in the worst case scenario of no agreement between the EU and UK, the likelihood is that UK export sales will not be subject to UK sales tax but subject to sales tax in the country of importation in the EU. One more or less offsets the other, the real additional cost being processing fees. The real problem is with purchases from small producers who are not registered for VAT. There will be no reduction by the deduction of UK VAT because it isn't (or shouldn't) be in the price to begin with and so this price will be inflated by the application of VAT at the prevailing rate in the country of importation. Note that while I have not checked recently from memory the threshold at which businesses in the UK are required to registered for VAT is about GBP 75k annual sales and I suspect there are some smaller outfits who say they are not registered but actually are and they may need to rethink this if they are to retain export sales. Regardless, as has been noted it will probably be prudent to consolidate purchases to the best extent possible to minimise import processing fees.

There is a new website, but I don't think there is anything in stock at present; https://www.ecwid.com/store/store1493122/

Thank you all this has been quite informative. Summing up so far:- live frogs are not necessary and using insulated frogs simplifies matters although there may be some risk (perhaps minimal) with short wheelbase locos. Thank you for the explanation of a "BUS", but from the depths of my memory I recollect something about care being required with the wire gauge, what should that be? Also appreciate the advise that reverse loops still need to be isolated, but to clarify does this mean a section of track within the loop (presumably sufficient to accommodate a full train?. The advise on the isolation of a programming track is also well noted. Beyond this what are the preferred or recommended control systems. I'm way out of touch but remember that the initial offerings such as Zero 1 and the Airfix systems were not compatible with each other and at least in the US the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA) established uniform standards which I presume all manufacturers now adhere to. But who are the preferred most popular producers and how do they compare, both on performance/features and price . I suspect there is a middle ground where the most expensive may not be full value for money and the least expensive while initially attractive may be a poor longer term choice. And of course since I like reverse loops do all producers facilitate them?

Hi DJ, the point of my question is to clarify that if all track section are live at all times in DCC, that points which isolate sections are unnecessary and as part of the process of transitioning to DCC it is preferable to install points with live frogs and if indeed insulfrog points are already installed it would be necessary to wire a feed across these points. Perhaps very basic but I'd like to be sure nothing is taken for granted.

This is a great topic and since I'm at a crossroads on taking the plunge into DCC and completely ignorant of what I may be getting into, I'm very interested in all and any contributions. So a couple of questions (which may seem silly to the informed), Noel, when you say Is it correct to assume that you were using points with live frogs rather that the isolated type? If using the latter you would have have tp provide a power feed to sections that would otherwise be isolated? Secondly, is there an issue with reverse loops? In DC since the polarity is reversed it is necessary to create a section of track that can be isolated to facilitate reversal of polarity. Dump questions perhaps but I'm dumb on this subject, Thanks