Mol_PMB

71 would the the other possibility, it survived until 1966. Seen in light green in 1961 a few posts up.

If you've got 69 and 79, I've got 1177 and 18, so there were at least 4

Most of the Irish ones are now sold out, only 4 out of the 15 types are still available: Search: 15 results found for "cie genesis" – Rails of Sheffield My black and tan one arrived yesterday only 24 hours after I placed the order. It's nice. In due course I will look at widening it, I think 2mm on the chassis and perhaps 4mm on the body. Can anyone confirm the correct body width for an Irish one? The model is a scale 8'0" over the body itself, I suspect an Irish one ought to be 9'0".

I hope they don't fart methane as badly as cows... I can well remember donkey carts on the Irish roads, often with a couple of milk churns, and the donkey prohibition signs at the start of the motorway (I think there was only one motorway back then).

Having seen your nice Leader model on the forum, it's got me thinking about this approach to CC1. CC1 had much smaller wheels and shorter bogies than Leader, so what class of diesel would be a good starting point? Let's have a look... CC1 had a wheel diameter of 3'7", bogie wheelbase of 6'4" + 6'4", bogie spacing of 36'0" and length over buffers of 60'0". The wheel diameter is a common one for GB diesel locos, but the bogie wheelbase is shorter than many of the common Co-Cos. For bogie wheelbase, the better options are: Class 37, 50, 55: 6'9" + 6'9" (i.e. overall bogie wheelbase is 10" too long, around 3mm on the model) Class 52: 6'1" + 6'1" (i.e. overall bogie wheelbase is 6" too short, 2mm on the model) I think either of those options would be acceptable to most people. Looking at the overall length and bogie spacing of the above classes, Class 37: 37'2" bogie spacing, 61'6" length over buffers Class 50: 42'8" bogie spacing, 68'6" length over buffers Class 55: 45'0" bogie spacing, 69'6" length over buffers Class 52: 42'6" bogie spacing, 68'0" length over buffers So the Class 37 is a pretty good match, it's 18" too long overall (6mm on the model, or 2.5% as a proportion of the total length). The bogie spacing is 14" too long, about 5mm on the model. I think that sort of percentage error would be generally acceptable to many. I'm pretty sure CC1 is wider than any GB loco so there should be no problem fitting the mechanism in the body. So, IRM 'just' need to do is take an Accurascale class 37 and dress it up as CC1...

Electrification doesn't just cost money, it also 'costs' carbon. There's a lot of steel, concrete, copper and other carbon-intensive materials required, along with the emissions from the equipment used to transport and install it. One might also include the embedded carbon in the new fleet of electric trains. So there's a payback period - how many years does the electric railway need to operate for, before its installation carbon footprint is offset by the emissions reductions of the electric trains? For an intensively-used railway the carbon payback period can be quite good, because once the electrification is in use the savings on fuel burnt by each train add up quickly (actually the benefits are more than just the exhaust emissions - electric trains are usually lighter, require less maintenance, etc.) Potentially the benefits can be greater than that if a faster, better train service leads to significant modal shift from road to rail. When electrifying a sparsely-served rural branch line, it may take decades for emissions reductions to offset the installation footprint. In some cases, it might never be worth doing, especially if the rural nature of the line would actually require more infrastructure such as power grid feeds to be installed. The presence of freight traffic, and the prospect of more modal shift to rail, can help make the electrification case look more favourable. As well as the global climate, there's also consideration of the local polluting emissions. For busy railways in urban areas, air quality can be a serious issue and helps to justify a move to 'zero emission at point of use' traction such as electricity or hydrogen. But in the rural parts of Ireland this really isn't a concern at all. That doesn't help the case for electrification. One might almost argue that for rural railways with sparse traffic, a better solution is to stay with diesel and plant some trees to offset the emissions.

Wonderful - I look forward to joining. I will have to prepare some photos of wagons with black underframes to see if we can re-create that expression More seriously, I'm planning to attend some of the Manchester IRRS meetings in person. Does anyone on this forum go to those - would be nice to put a face to a name. Cheers, Mol

Not for me either, but thanks for the heads-up. The Ellis Clark prices can be quite good.

I'm always in awe of his rate of progress, and how he turns such unpromising components into a great looking model. I almost wish I hadn't binned my MTK Irish coaches some years ago; I could have a go at rebuilding them to a better standard. But sadly life changes left them in a landfill somewhere.

This evening I'm pottering in CorelDraw doing artwork for some early containers. More to do yet, I'm planning to do a range of CIE, B+I, BELL, Irish Ferryways. These are intended for my own use but if anyone else might be interested in some of these please let me know. I get them printed by Precision Decals using an ALPS printer on clear backing. A little more care is need in applying them compared to the Railtec transfers, but they can provide a very good result.

Super! I am tempted by one of these myself, so it's good to see one nicely built and painted. Is it motorised? If not, do you think it could be?

As I get older I find my memory isn't as good as it once was. When I went out to the shed to find the tools for mounting the display cabinets, I reminded myself that I'd got this, that's been screwed to the wall out there for 15 years or more and I'd completely forgotten about it! Well that's the identity sorted for a 121 class model! 131 was the first 121 class I travelled behind (or perhaps in front of - it was on the Limerick-Junction shuttle). I should have used this to check the artwork for my custom transfers - I didn't get the ends of the 3 quite right. I'll have to do the 3s again again...

Those ones would be the wrong length for an Irish corrugated wagon, but perhaps they could be made in other lengths as an optional accessory? I wonder if they would look effective in semi-translucent yellow as a more modern alternative to the traditional sheet material?

Whilst I still consider layout and track options, I've bought and installed a pair of cabinets for my Irish models. They're not the expensive sort, but they'll do! It took a bit of care to get them perfectly aligned in all planes so that the glass panes can be slid through one to reach the other, but I have managed that despite the walls not being quite flat. They are a very snug fit in the available space! Enough space for 70 traditional wagons! But they'll soon fill up with longer things, and aren't efficient for displaying coaches as each shelf is 450mm long.

Yep!

Over on RMWeb, Rapido are asking for suggestions on liveries for the next batch of Evolution coaches: https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/topic/188351-evolution-coaches-48-non-corridor-rolling-stock/?do=findComment&comment=5724666 Now's your chance to put in a vote for some CIE (or earlier) liveries. This lovely photo posted recently by Ernie isn't far off in styling, but the Rapido coaches are non-corridor, non-gangwayed. Were there suitable prototypes in Ireland? A quick scan at the IRRS archives indicates that the CBSCR had some carriages of about the right length and styling. https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishrailwayarchive/53509091095/in/album-72157662268090968 So did the GSWR: https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishrailwayarchive/53508744101 Possibly the DSER: https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishrailwayarchive/53508837918 Possibly a negative point is that, so far, Rapido have insisted on all making all coach types in all liveries. I'm not sure all their coach types are similar to Irish prototypes, and it would be much harder to see a production batch of 5 different types, than 1 or 2 types. I could see a fair number of people adding a couple of 8-compartment bogie thirds to their trains of Genesis 6-wheelers.

I think typically 5000 to 10000 psi for hydrogen gas storage.

I gather that some of his proposed departmental secretaries might be partial to the occasional tot of whiskey...

Some car makers have certainly backed the Hydrogen horse. Some of the same risks are there, but cars generally have a less severe vibration environment, and of course the volume of storage needed is much less for a 1-ton car than a 1500-ton train, which scales down a lot of the risks. Another challenge with hydrogen that I didn't mention before is that many common materials (including steel fabrications) become brittle in the presence of hydrogen, as it affects their microstructure. Making tanks and pipework to store and transfer hydrogen (which either has to be at extremely high pressure or very cold) is quite a challenge.

The tender could be lettered (experi)MENTAL HYDROGEN BURNING LOCOMOTIVE. That is a good idea, though again the energy density of batteries isn't great for hauling a heavy train long distances. There are some interesting applications of this where the batteries are built into ISO containers so they can be swapped quite easily with existing infrastructure. It's much better if you can use the traction motors for braking and regenerate the energy into the batteries, which is what modern electric vehicles do, but very difficult to retro-fit to 1970s technlogy. By the time you've replaced all the traction motors, alternator, power control systems etc, and the basis of the loco is still 50 years old, you would be better off buying something new.

Off-topic, I spotted these in your sidings, which look great! Did you do a Provincial Wagons kit at some stage? I was wondering about making one from a modified Parkside kit.

Hydrogen is challenging as a transport fuel because it leaks through materials that we would normally think of as solid, and all the joints in pipework have to be to a very high standard. Railway locos are notoriously a high-vibration environment, which can tend to make pipe joints leaky... Also, its energy density is low compared to diesel, so you need more space to store it in - hence the tender. Which is going to be connected to the loco how? Bearing in mind the leaks issue and the need for flexible hoses. It would probably need to be semi-permanently coupled, and the tender would therefore also need a driving cab, and some interesting discussion with the unions about the safety of sitting on a hydrogen tank. Finally, did you know that hydrogen burns with an invisible flame? If you have a leak and it ignites, you can't see it. First thing you know is when something else passes through the flame and it catches fire. That something else could be you! It's not impossible, but for the rail traction application there are far more proven, reliable, safer alternatives. Hydrogen is a means for governments to spend relatively small amounts of money on research and claim they're doing something, while kicking the more expensive infrastructure spend into the future and someone else's problem. Cynical? Moi?

Yes, they've been sold out for a while and I missed out on them - I'm hoping IRM will have a few spares available once the orders have been sent out. Perhaps your 'CC1' should be coupled up to a long train of vans to free up some siding space?

I appreciate the model is a generic and is also standard gauge. However, comparing photos of the model to photos of the real vans that received black and tan livery, my observations are as follows: The general appearance, layout and length of the vans is a good match. The roof profile is a close match to 1077 and 18, but different from the older vans The panelling is also a close match to 1077 and 18, but different from the older vans The application of black and tan livery is closer to 1077 than 18. The model has windows in the double doors, not present on the Irish vans (not too hard to change) The Irish vans have a window instead of a deadlight adjacent to the double doors, not present on the model (not too hard to change) The arrangement of vents and lamps on the roof is different (not too hard to change) The model has the ducket to the left of the guard's door on both sides, while the Irish vans have both duckets towards the same end of the van - left of the door on one side and right of the door on the other To regauge to 21mm I would need to widen the chassis by 2mm. The body also needs widening, perhaps by more than 2mm? I guess it should be either 9'0" or 9'6" wide over the body itself, the duckets wider still. Not sure how wide the model would be. Is it justifiable within my modelling interests? Well geographically, 1077 seems to have got everywhere on that railtour, even outposts like Fenit. 18 appears in photos at Cork and Tralee. The year 1964 is a bit early for me, but I can always invoke rule 1. I can stick it in the mail train with all the tin vans and TPOs that IRM are about to churn out

Nice! Hopefully the wheels won’t fall off.