Ironroad

Presumably the Hatton's allocation will trickle elsewhere across the distribution chain

I need some clarification as to the descriptions provided on the IRM website; No. 5231 is described as a standard yet the picture appears to be a composite No. 5212 is described as a standard yet the picture appears to be a 1st No. 5203 is described as a standard yet the picture looks like a 1st Is it the case that the wrong pictures are posted and these should be pictures of the standard and the only composite is 5154 and the only 1st is 5103 Many Thanks

Thank you, that makes sense (just 4 running numbers in all).

Are there no limits to where the mind wanders, I thought the presentation box was wooden

Hi Dave, harking back to this post from quite a while ago, these coaches were sold in shrink wrapped twin packs and just one running number is advertised on the exterior of each pack. So do you know the running numbers of the second coach in each pack? I have pack MM4101 and that contained coach no 4101 & 4108 with IR logos. But since there is a pack numbered 4108 with the IE logo, that would seem to indicate a repeat of the numbers in the different logos. I ask this in the context of the imminent release of the IRM MK2B & C coaches which are complimentary. Thank you Tom

A word of caution if ordering MM MK2D coaches from Rails of Sheffield. The descriptions and the pictures on their website don't match properly, in some instances they are showing pictures of these coaches in Supertrain livery. It's a pity that MM did not update their website to ensure no confusion on what is being released.

All very true, but some of the content of the announcement seems ominous, particularly the references to ageing demographic and no new blood. And they allude to a deterioration in the commercial environment. This on the heels of the Hattons closure. Even a giant like Hornby has had financial troubles and their behaviour and that of Bachmann has not been exemplary and speaks of fear. Let us just hope these things are no more than indicators of change and readjustment.

That speaks volumes

This is tragic and sad news. An institution in the model trade and the very best retailer in the business with customer service second to none. I well remember visiting the shop on Smithdown Rd as far back as 1963 and eagerly reviewing their monthly listings received via the post (produced on a Gestetner duplicating machine) long before the internet, such was their vision. I'm shocked and will miss the convenience of shopping there. They were a one stop shop for a very wide and comprehensive range of mainstream products (with the best shipping rates) and that is something all of us should keep in mind when we choose to bypass a store like this and buy online directly from a manufacturer.

Over a year ago Stephen indicated a J15 was not on the more immediate agenda, but didn't rule it out in the long term

Maybe you could do that for 461 and just maybe it has sufficient commonality. I believe it operated on passenger and freight services widely across the network (south of the border) between 1923 and 1962, and again in preservation from 1990. Even those modelling realively recent times can justify it hauling models of RPSI stock.

Patience is in order, we waited a long time for the 121 but we got them eventually. Paddy is indeed a one man operation and that probably contributes enormously to the viability of his business but being relatively small probably has an impact on his influence with the producers. He may announce something but may have little control if for example the production run is bumped. What do we know about this rerun, is it being commissioned from Bachmann as before or independently by MM?

Thank you, that sounds very positive (and promising )

Twelve months ago you said this;- " I can promise several things next year, including steam," You didn't keep that promise, that's what I mean by disappointment.

Please no more promises with the ensuing disappointment. Tell us when you are actually doing something and stop alluding to what might be.

So just one day of 2023 left, I'm waiting with bated breath for the big announcement tomorrow.

Lovely, but not a soul in sight?

I cannot view (or hear) these videos either, nor will they download. I'm using a google notebook. After I click on the three vertical dots (to the right of the play bar), it goes through the motions of downloading and shows the video as a file in the download folder, but all I get when I open the file is a black screen. Something is incompatible.

It seems so, "Ricardo" the bull recovering at animal sanctuary after ... CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com › ... › Local News

I don't have pictures but these sketches may help, copied from https://igg.org.uk/rail/5-unit/unitload1.htm

Many thanks to John for taking the time to provide such an amazingly detailed response to the questions I was asking. My objective was to establish legitimacy for using available models of British Rail containers as loads on Irish wagons and that looks to be the case, albeit not on the LB flats. However I got more than I bargained for. The pictures already posted of standard BD type containers would seem to prove that these were to be seen on Irish Rails with both British Rail logos and with BLMC (British Leyland) labels. However while their use for the transportation of meat probably suggests there were significant numbers of these containers to be seen, those used for this traffic were probably not of the standard type. British Rail had two variants for meat traffic, the BM container which was ventilated & in Crimson Lake, Maroon, & Bauxite liveries depending on period, and the FM which was insulated had a plywood body and white livery Both had different end doors to the BD. Source; https://igg.org.uk/rail/5-unit/unitload1.htm Since one question invariably leads to another it would be interesting to know if both BM and FM containers were used for Irish meat traffic. Since I'm not aware of models of the BM and FM variants I'll probably content myself with a few of the BD type. One in Lyons Tea colours would be nice and perhaps a simple repaint job assuming the lettering can be found - may I ask what is the origin of the one in your picture John? Thanks

In a partial answer to my own question, I came across the following picture taken from a U Tube video. In the top right corner there is an open corrugated wagon with a British Rail BD container sitting in it. But were these containers also carried on the LB flats, did CIE own any of these? and other than British Leyland were any other private owner BD containers carried. Oh and before anyone says it, while the video is titled The Wheels of Commerce 1961, the frame I'm referring to is obviously a much later date.

Are these the pre ISO containers (from Parkside/Peco) that Fran has indicated were carried by these flat wagons? If so were they private owner or were any owned by CIE and in what liveries etc.? In a thread titled Irish/CIE Coal Wagons, Mayner posted a picture (Aug 17 2020) of CIE open 5 plank wagons carrying British Leyland containers of this type dating from about 1970. So is it possible that British Rail owned containers of this type were also seen on Irish Rails (as produced by Bachmann)?

For those that might be interested, there was some discussion previously on the topic of cars being carried in flat wagons, refer to the thread Ernies Massive 1930's to 2005 Photo Archive, Apr 6 & 7 2021. I was thinking the same thing, you beat me to it. A classic scene.

I hear what you are saying and I don't wish to seem contrary but what I find maddening is the the horribly inept, inefficient and unimaginative use of the network over many decades. Who degraded the MGWR network? Dare I say it was KIngsbridge centric pipe smokers after the formation of the GSWR, succeeded and perpetuated by a similar ilk in CIE. Plain and simple if there is congestion on the southern line, that was engineered by CIE/Irish Rail by eliminating alternative routes. Routing trains to Ballina, Westport and Galway by sending them south is logical ???. Despite the sabotage of the MGWR network, it should be relatively inexpensive to restore the double track sections given that the track bed still exists. I suspect that cost would be a a lot less than they are lavishing on what should be simple suburban halts- which is a horrible misuse of funds, that does nothing to facilitate the travelling public or fulfil their mandate. As regards traffic on the line between Dublin and Maynooth, this is is very light with only 47 trains each way on weekdays. (an average of 23 minutes between trains). So Ballina, Westport and Galway trains would actually improve service to Maynooth. There is a self financing aspect to all of this as money could go into restoring infrastructure rather than additional rolling stock to service Maynooth.. I sincerely doubt that providing a simple halt station at Ballyfermot should be a problem despite the level of traffic on the line. it's just an additional stop for trains already using the route. As I said if it could be done at Clongriffin it can and should be done there.