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

On 10/12/2012 at 10:07 AM, WRENNEIRE said:

August 06 saw Murphys next release

IR & IE Mk 2A'S

4 sets made, MM4101, MM4102, MM4108 & MM4110

504 of each set produced

First models to be produced with any reference to Murphy Models.

 

 

MM4110 IE

 

MM4108 IE

 

MM4101 IR

 

 

4102IR

 

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

9 hours ago, BosKonay said:

Shop local  

If you can’t find what you need then Rails shopping to ireland works fine. They don’t charge VAT and you pay an post on arrival in the usual way these days. 

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.

9 minutes ago, Broithe said:

It is hard to do these things, especially on a voluntary basis, and they sometimes just do have a 'life-cycle'.

I used to do fairly large outdoor events at various stately homes - car rallies. The number of people who would actually turn up and do something, both before and during the event would steadily drop over time and it eventually became clear that we (that were left) just couldn't do it all ourselves, even though we got better and more efficient. If you're wise enough, you will stop before it all falls to pieces on the day...

The events get bigger and the active personnel dwindle.

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.

15 hours ago, Patrick Davey said:

Two steam projects - interesting!  My money is still on one (or both?) being preserved RPSI, maybe one blue and one green/black/grey although I’m still not convinced that IRM would overshadow OO Works with an even better J15.  And I suppose it doesn’t even have to be a preserved locomotive, since the OO Works U and UG sold out…. 

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

35 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

Either way, if it's steam, I will need to concoct an excuse for it to go to Dugort Harbour.....

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.

On 6/12/2022 at 2:18 AM, BosKonay said:

I agree all should be encouraged but it’s also not sensible to assume that a RTR manufacturer won’t get to a prototype that runs with the RPSI in time. I can promise several things next year, including steam, but the j15 will not be coming from IRM in the next 24 months. 
Hope that clarifies what I mean by ‘never say never’. 

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.

4 hours ago, Mayner said:

He (the bull)is supposed to have escaped from a slaughter house, done well if he has been adopted by an animal sanctuary.

It seems so, 

"Ricardo" the bull recovering at animal sanctuary after ...

CBS News

https://www.cbsnews.com › ... › Local News

14 hours ago, murphaph said:

Any pics of these different BR container variants for those of us with no clue about them?

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

On 9/12/2023 at 3:43 PM, Ironroad said:

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)?

    

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.

26 minutes ago, leslie10646 said:

Nice piece of social history, WCR.

Now, I wonder what the three guys with the open newspaper are reading so avidly. Looks like the back pages, so maybe the Gee-Gee results?

I was thinking the same thing, you beat me to it. A classic scene.

1 hour ago, Flying Snail said:

Ballina, Westport, Galway, Limerick, Tralee, Cork and Waterford intercity services, as well as the Portlaoise suburban services all use that line into Heuston. I'm still not sure there's spare capacity even if they reopened Mullingar to Athlone and moved the Connacht traffic back to its 'spiritual home'. It would make for slower journey times west and introduce congestion for the suburban services east of Maynooth on the Sligo line. I expect it would probably require major additional works too - and not just on the stretch between Mullingar and Athlone.

Don't get me wrong: I think there should be a station in Ballyfermot by the way, and I agree it probably should have been done years ago. I just don't think that it's that straightforward as things currently stand. I'm hopeful that DART+ will bring major improvements and I'm pleased to see DoctorPan's confirmation that a Kylemore Station is in the pipeline.

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.