murphaph

That's great Rich, thx.

My planned layout (the"big idea" in my head) involves the Limerick Junction to Limerick line (possibly with branch to Foynes and an off-scene Castlemungret cement factory), with Limerick Station and Limerick Junction being the two main areas of interest, all modelled at waist height. Then (connected via helixes) a narrow shelf layout at slightly below eye level running all around the room (10*30 feet), carrying the Dublin-Cork mainline (really just a section of it north of Limerick Junction). I am looking to model the early to mid 90s before CWR. Am I right in thinking that bullhead would be appropriate for the mainline? What about the rest? Edit, I've just realised this is all a bit of a thread hijack on my part. I do apologise. I think I should move this to its own thread maybe.

I'll try to get that thanks a lot. Mr. Rice's books were generally recommended but I didn't find that one. However I have ordered his "Introduction to 4mm Fine Scale Railway Modelling (RailModel Handbook)" which I found for €10 on Amazon. I will try to get the one you've linked to here as well. I like to read a bit before I attempt something, even if there's a saying in my host nation "Probieren geht über Studieren" (trying to do something is better than just studying it).

Are you guys using jigs to make the vee? A good how-to on YouTube wouldn't go amiss. Anyone know of any? I've ordered a book called "Track" from the 2mm society. They claim much of it is scale independent. I think I will end up joining the EMGS to get access to their stores.

I'm also thinking 21mm to "E"M standards. This really should be called "TOM" (Twenty One Millimetre)!

I see you're building that on your workbench. What is the general consensus on 'where' to build? In-situ or pre-built as the work bench? Just personal taste or advantages for any particular method?

It's really very tempting in my case, despite the fairly big plans I have (the layout room is ca. 10' x 30'). I am at the stage where I haven't put any real money into track. Just a small test oval using H0 track. If I plumped for 21mm I think I would almost certainly want to "keep it simple" (ie not go down the P4 route) as it's the track gauge that bothers me the most, not flange heights etc. I think copper clad sleepers with soldered rails appeals the most to me, perhaps using the 5:1 ratio with ply sleepers. I will have to get a hold of some gauges and whatnot and just build a short stretch and see how I get on.

They are the business. When and where were these used on the network?

Looks fantastic. Will it be straightforward to regauge like other Irish RTR stock of late?

Reading this thread has really got me thinking about 21mm for my dream layout. It just looks sooo right. Luckily for now I don't have to make any decisions as I'm in stock collection mode for another couple of years (too many other building projects around our house for me to "get permission" to start a layout yet!) 21mm straight Flexi track might one day become available as a "commodity item" that would have a constant if small demand but a large selection of points will never happen. Market is just too small and if you have to hand build some points you'll probably build them all to save money. Straight track though is inexpensive and I would suspect mind numbingly boring to build by hand.

Maybe a failed traction motor but pantograph raised to provide power to the train?

The "received wisdom" says don't tack (except to hold during gluing), glue. The reason behind that is noise transmission prevention. The more decoupled the track is from the baseboards, the less "rumble" you should have. In fact some people have even moved on from cork to other materials to better insulate the track from the baseboards.

I am looking forward to having many "unusual" bonnet first workings on my layout some day!

That's a good point about having some pristine examples. I think I will spare at least one of each of my IRM models from the weathering station and put them all together in a glass display case at eye level. As for the Kadee conversion... I will also want most of my wagons on Kadees though I have seen the idea of small fixed mini rakes (the McKinley Railway uses the idea of "triplets" which are permanently coupled rakes of three small wagons with couplers on the outer ends. I can't remember if they use Kadees for the outer couplers but that isn't relevant). I think this fixed triplet idea has merit for things like the cement bubbles and ballasts. It's cheaper and easier. I want to try an alternative solution to the ballasts (when I get some) and bubbles. I think it may be possible to glue a second NEM pocket to the underside of the existing pocket. The height deviation from the standard is 2.1mm I believe so this may work. The advantage would be that the pocket (in fact either pocket!) could be used as intended with different couplers, should one ever lend stock to someone else who doesn't use Kadees. It will depend on how thin walled I can source replacement pockets.

Sorry for any confusion. I meant the Irish Railway Rambler book. The picture shows a failed 121 at Clara on the mainline in charge of a rake of mkIII suburban coaches. I haven't the book to hand right now to check the page number but it's in the chapter on 121s and the author noted the rarity of the event in the caption.

The picture I mentioned above is in the IRR book and shows a 121 bonnet first at Clara in 1990. Looks really cool like that.

There's at least one "bonnet first" image of a 121 in tippex livery that I'm aware of so it did (very rarely) happen later in their lives. I can look for it later.

On page 56 of Irish Railway Rambler there is a tippexed EGV (rest of train still in ST) and the it does not appear to have all black coach ends yet. The wraparound orange and black ST seems intact to me, with just the tippex stripes being added and stopping a few inches around the corner of the end of the coach. The EGV is not identified in the book. The photograph is very early IR days though (87) but it's still valid I think. I doubt it would have gotten the black ends for a while after that shot was taken.

I'd be mostly interested in standards.

Hi Noel. Yeah as I wrote above I understand that the sound files are the intellectual property of the authors and cannot and should not (even if it were technically possible) copied. My question was about the CV settings only.

I'm going to pickup a Lokprogrammer in any case. They come up used on eBay here (Germany) regularly enough. I'll snag one of those. Could one buy a master MM decoder for each type and then copy all the CV settings (I stress NOT the copyright sound file which AFAIK cannot be read back out of a programmed decoded) and then "just" install your own sound file on a blank Loksound, using the saved CV data rather than programming from scratch? This would not fall foul of any IP rules I believe but correct me if I'm wrong. I don't need absolutely perfect sound. A good approximation of the engine from a US loco would be good enough for me but I would want all the lighting to work perfectly. @controller: T-Cut you get in a motor factors. Be careful with it. I've seen videos of it removing the paint before the loco number. Charlie Bishop's Chadwick Model Railway YouTube channel has an episode on renumbering locos.

Thanks a lot for the prompt clarification Fran. That answer obviously pleases me I missed the ballasts first time round but I know you've hinted at a second run perhaps late this year. I am assuming they will be identical to the first run, including pocket height? I will still definitely buy 2 rakes and a second set of ploughs regardless of pocket height but great to hear that just those 3 earlier models deviate from the standard (and I accept you had your reasons there). I got my first ploughs on Monday and I'm astounded how finely detailed they are! Just waiting for the hoppers! All the best, Phil

This has been an informative thread. Is it an ongoing issue that NEM pockets for Irish stock are not at the correct height/depth according to the standard? I note that Kadee explicitly state that they do not make offset NEM couplings because the pocket height above the rail should be uniform. Personally I would be prepared to sacrifice fidelity (the coupling itself is never going to be a true representation of the prototype) for interoperability without having to shim rolling stock etc. I'd be interested to hear what IRM's policy on NEM pocket standard will be in the future.

I'd take IR too of course. Even better in fact.

I have never attempted anything like this but would it be possible to use masking tape to achieve a straight line not for painting but to slide the decal lining up against? To be honest I think you're being about hard on yourself. It looks good to me as it is.