lucas

Yes, the frames are spaced with 25mm between

I found it lying around in the bottom of my stash. It does have lights and recessed cab handrails (or at least the recesses, the handrails themselves aren't included). No chassis of course; it has mounting for a Black Beetle/Tenshodo motor bogie, but that's not the most suitable chassis for a slow running shunter. I don't have the drawings so I can't speak on the accuracy, not sure if they're available somewhere? I have had some vague plans of building one in 7mm scale at some point and have mostly just been keeping this little guy around as a reference/reminder.

There is the DC Kits resin one, which I believe Mike Edge created the masters for (possibly from the Worsley Works kit). It's a G611 just like the WW kit, while Silver Fox is a G601. Not sure if they're still sold though. I have an unbuilt one lying around somewhere here...

Interesting that they have 2mm axles unlike the Mark 2s. They might not be so difficult to regauge after all so. Is there anything inside the sleeves preventing the axle ends from moving further in? One thing I worry about is that the axles will slowly work their way further into the sleeves over time, changing the BTB and overall axle length, but also running the risk of shorting out internally. I'm still patiently awaiting my order, but looking forward to doing some experimentation when they arrive.

Yes that is the most obvious difference, but there are a few others. I have come across at least 3 different variants of the bogie frame. There doesn't seem to be any clear pattern for which appeared on which loco, with two different variants often appearing on the same loco. In fact they seem to have gotten swapped around over the years, presumably when multiple locos were in Inchicore at the same time they ended up with each other’s bogies. I have a spreadsheet of which loco had which bogie type(s) throughout the years, but it's still a work in progress. I'll share more details when I have a better picture myself. All I'm saying for now is IRM better have their eyes on the ball

Don't get me started on the bogies, I've noticed quite a few variations there too Expect another post on that once I've had a bit more time to research

That's good to know, thanks! I hadn't come across photos of them operating in multiple or push-pull so I was wondering what they were intended for. Edit: I actually found (what I assume is) the picture you're talking about. B233 working multiple with B192 on p. 36 of Irish Metro-Vick Diesels by Barry Carse

Not much to share in terms of progress of late. I have been working in parallel on both the chassis and some detail parts, but I'll wait until I have a bit more progress before showing that off. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some research I’ve been doing on the differences between the Crossley- and GM-powered locos. I’ll be modelling the original Crossley-engined locos, but many of the best photographs are much more recent. So it’s good to know what has changed and what hasn’t so I know which photos I can rely on. Also, I just find it interesting There’s a fantastic video from Gerry Conmy on YouTube with a lot of pictures showing the re-engining process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL1r5Ipeb1w. I have posted some screenshots of the video below where I haven’t been able to find other images, but there is a lot of good material in the video and it’s well worth a watch. Roof changes As I mentioned in my original post, the roof seems to have undergone the most drastic changes during the re-engining process. It is also one of the least photographed parts of these locos, but probably the most visible on a model. As-built, the C class rooves had 5 removable panels. Starting from the no.1 end (the radiator end) there is a small panel containing a relatively small 6-blade radiator fan, a small panel containing the header tank filler, the largest panel with some blank space and the engine compartment vents, another large panel containing the generator compartment vents and the exhaust, and finally another small featureless panel. The vents on the engine compartment roof are similar to those on the A class and allow some ventilation for the engine since neither loco has any vents on the body side. The generator compartment roof vents are unique to the C class. The one on the left-hand side seems to be for the exhauster; the A class has an extra grille on its body side for the same purpose. The one on the right is less obvious. It could be to allow some ventilation for the load regulator’s resistor banks which are on that side, or perhaps it is just there for symmetry. The A class doesn’t seem to have any equivalent ventilation near its load regulator as far as I can tell. The exhaust actually stretches above the generator and exits on the far opposite end of the generator compartment, as can be seen in this picture with the two larger roof panels removed. Note the loco is facing the opposite direction compared to the image above. When the much more powerful GM engines were fitted, the class had much larger radiators and a larger 8-blade fan installed. To accommodate this the roof panel containing the fan was also enlarged. The header tank filler panel seems to be the same size, just positioned a little further back due to the larger fan. The filler itself had changed, sticking out noticeably higher than the old one. The large engine compartment panel was fractionally enlarged and modified to accommodate the new engine. The vents seem to be the same size, but were moved to the opposite end of the panel, nearer the radiator fan on the no. 1 end. A hole was cut between the two vents for the exhaust silencer with two slot-shaped exhaust ports. Unlike the Crossley, the exhaust sits right above the engine. An extra 'hump' was also added on one side behind the vents to cover the new Roots blower. The A class has two such humps, one on either side, but the C class has just one. With the larger fan and engine vent panels, the generator vent panel was cut down to compensate. The panel and the vents it houses were reduced to around ⅔ size post-transplant. The two holes for the old exhaust ports were also removed. The last small blank panel seems to be the only one that went completely unchanged. Here is a picture demonstrating the changes. You can clearly see the weld lines from where things were modified, including the two spots where the old Crossley exhausts used to be. Other exterior changes As mentioned, the GM engine required the fitting of larger radiators which also meant the radiator grilles got enlarged by a considerable amount on both sides. A new external fuel gauge was also fitted on either side requiring a small cutout in the bottom edge bodywork near the middle. Another smaller pill-shaped cutout nearer the no. 1 end was removed on some of the locos, but not all. I think this was probably to access the radiator drain valve, but I’m not entirely sure. Along with the transplant, the locos underwent a few other changes during the process. This included large GM headlights fitted to the ‘forehead’ on either end of the loco. This is probably the most obvious external change, but there were quite a few others too. As built, they had a fairly minimal amount of equipment on the buffer beam, just a vacuum hose. During the transplant an MU (multiple unit) socket and air brakes were fitted to allow them to operate push-pull trains with the AEC former-railcars. A handful had previously been fitted with ETH (electric train heating) sockets, but these were all removed during the transplant. The locos were also fitted with staff catchers. Unlike the A class, the Cs never had them previously. And of course, they were given a new lick of paint and a new B2XX classification to denote the increased power. You can clearly see most of these changes comparing these two photos: Note 206 did not have small pill-shaped opening on the body side removed, while most others did. Perhaps if I was modelling a GM-engined loco I’d have the motivation to go trawling through photographs to figure out exactly which ones had this opening covered up and which didn’t. The picture below shows C201 in Inchicore post-transplant but pre-repaint, and you can clearly see this opening has been freshly covered up: https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishrailwayarchive/54778612658/ Maybach Transplants C233 and C234 were given initially Maybach engines in the mid-60s. At the time GM weren’t willing to sell engines on their own, just complete locos. Apparently, they were worried that GM engines fitted in iffy machinery would harm their reputation. They did of course change their minds a few years later when CIÉ had proven to be a loyal customer. The Maybach engined locos shared some exterior details with both the Crossley and GM locos, but also had some of their own unique changes. Similar to the GM locos, the Maybachs had a larger fan installed on a suitably enlarged roof panel. However, the rest of the roof layout stayed mostly the same as before. The vents were perhaps slightly repositioned, and it seems like some of the blank space on the largest panel was removed to make room for the larger fan. I can’t find any good images of the roof showing the exhaust. I seem to remember stumbling upon an image in the past showing a singular round exhaust, but I could be mistaken. Larger radiator grilles were present on the sides similar to the later GMs. The same external fuel gauge was also fitted. And the pill-shaped hole seems to have stuck around on both 233 and 234 until their later GM transplants. An MU socket and air brakes were added to the Maybachs too, but the MU socket was in a slightly lower position. This required relocating the dummy coupling for the vacuum hose to the opposite side so it wouldn’t be in the way. One of the most obvious unique differences is the removal of one of the ‘porthole’ windows on the right side of the body. They also did not receive either the GM headlights or the staff catchers that the later rebuilds did. However, they did receive the B2XX reclassification. Here are some pictures illustrating the differences between front ends of the 3 variants. The first picture shows a Maybach- (left) and Crossley-engined loco (right) side by side. The second shows a Maybach- (centre) and GM-engined loco (right), with a GM-enigned Ar lurking in the background on the left. https://www.flickr.com/photos/152343870@N07/52050288065/ The two Maybachs did receive GM engines nearly 10 years after the rest of the fleet, along with their GM headlights. But I can’t seem to find any pictures of them with staff catchers, so they may never have had these. They did not lose all their Maybach-isms either. Here is are some photos of 233 and NIR 109 (formerly 234) showing the missing window and relocated vacuum hose still present long after being re-re-engined: https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishrailwayarchive/54777525252/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/152343870@N07/52094277983/

Does this picture posted in the Park Royal thread not show a dark green one? The 4th coach is a fair bit darker than the first three. But it's hard to know for sure it's not just a shadow. Here's a quote from DCDR's website about the livery: DCDR's 1944 was previously 1381, only the third PR sequentially, so it lends credence to the theory that the first few were painted dark green. Some of the mainline PRs were also painted silver for a time, so there was clearly still some experimentation going on. I think I read somewhere that the mainline PRs were all silver at first, but I'm not sure how true that is.

When I was young I was a passenger aboard a heritage train (in Belgium if I remember correctly) involved in such an accident. A few cars had already queued up at the crossing, but the car in question apparently thought they were just parked up and decided to overtake. How this individual passed their driving test I'll never know! We were sitting in the back of the train so we hadn't realised what had happened until the guard told us. Little 8 year old Lucas was bawling crying thinking the locomotive had been destroyed. In reality the train was going at most 2mph as we were pulling into the station just beyond the crossing; once we disembarked we could see the only damage to the train was a bit of paint transfer on the buffer. Luckily nobody was injured, but the car came out looking a little worse for wear.

According to this post a couple years ago from @jhb171achill the correct dark green is BS 226 Mid Brunswick Green:

If you could get some measurements of the wheelset and the bogie that should be great! Just to double check; wheel diameter should be 12mm, axle length should be 28mm, and there would need to be >~24.5mm space between the frames. And you wouldn't be able to get an accurate measure of the cone angle on the axle pinpoint? I'll get the measurements for the Park Royals when they arrive here, and take it from there. I don't think there is an easy way to avoid that unfortunately. As far as I know I can't deduct VAT the way a business can. I had thought about splitting the shipment (sending half to Ireland and half to the UK) but we'd end up paying shipping twice in that case and for a small order it's actually a good chunk of the overall price. So that really wouldn't end up being any cheaper in the end. I'd read quite the opposite in a few places. Something about the sleeve being what maintains the proper gauge in OO. Also the difficulty in moving metal wheel on metal axle, unless you have the proper tools to do that. I wonder if it's the 2mm axle or the pinpoint angle that causes issues? or both? I know some axles are made to 55° angle while others are 60°. Could it be that the bearing expects a 55° angle while the axle is 60°? It would be ideal if a 2mm axle could work with the correct cone angle.

A couple of weeks ago, while browsing the forums well after my bedtime, I half jokingly asked how difficult it would be to have some aftermarket wheel sets made to regauge the upcoming IRM Park Royals. The Park Royals use split-axle wheel sets similar to the Mark 2s for electrical pickups for the interior lighting. This has the side effect of making them a bit of a pain to regauge. To answer my own question, I did a little digging and found a guy who's happy to run off a small batch of wheels for a half decent price. So would there actually be enough interest to justify producing some wheels? They would 12mm diameter EM profile wheels set to 19.3mm back-to-back on a 28mm long 2mm diameter split-axle. I know this is not ideal for those using P4, but I guess it's better than nothing? From what I can tell 21mm EM seems to be more popular (and it's also selfishly what I'm using). These will be designed to fit the Park Royals when mine arrive. They should also fit the Mark 2s, I don't see why they wouldn't, but I don't personally own any to test with. If someone can send me a few measurements of theirs to double check it would be much appreciated! The cost should work out to around €9-€10 per coach (set of 4 axles), depending a little bit on how many I order and what I end up getting charged for import tax. So, I'm trying to gauge interest to see if anyone else would want a set. I'm happy to take on the risk of ordering the wheel sets, but only if I can be somewhat sure I will sell them. Please reply below or send me a PM letting me know how many sets you would want for either the Park Royals or Mark 2s. This is purely to get an idea of numbers, I'm not accepting pre-orders. I don't want to take anyone's money until I have the wheels in hand. But on the off chance I run out, anyone who expresses interest now would get priority.

I think I might have an old one lying around at my parents' house Not sure if it's still there (or if it still works) but I'll can check next time I'm there

Ok, I know we're getting very off-topic for a thread that's meant to be about Black and Tan. This is my last post about it, I swear. Any of these look better? Seems like almost every website I came across has a similar but slightly different representation of what should be the same colour. On-screen colours are additive while pigments are subtractive so none will be completely accurate. Unless someone gets their hands on some physical colour samples it would be impossible to tell for sure. Then CIÉ's paint supplier may not have matched the intended colour with 100% accuracy either. Of course BS 221 may not actually be correct either, CIÉ did use their own names for the brown and tan livery. So who knows. In doing a little more late-night internet sleuthing I found the question about the dark green livery had already been answered a couple years ago: