BSGSV

I think they are electric wires going to the signal lamps, instead of having oil. That looks like B234 in the background. If so, it's late-60's rather than early?

A lot of country lads at Dublin sheds too! Others have commented on the traversing jacks, but the fishplates look like items designed for the spiked track in the photo. There's no soleplates, just the track flange spiked to the sleeper. The fishplates appear to have a dual function in bolting the two rails together, and having a hole, either end, to either bolt or spike down the track on to the sleeper, just at the joint where a bit more support would be useful.

The City Basin site seems to have an army of builders at it currently. I do hope they don't destroy the lovely warehouses.

CAWS was not fitted coincidentally with the original Mainline CTC section. It only started appearing with the DART resignalling on the Dublin Suburban. The diesel locos used the track codes for CAWS, the DART units for ATP. CAWS was retrofitted to the Mainline CTC in the early 1980's. So no locos with "S" in 1975!

I don't see any "Limit of Shunt" boards on the diagram (to stop moves in the wrong direction proceeding too far), but then, there's no Facing Point Locks shown either. So I would say that, judging by the closeness of the two crossovers on the branch (to main line and run-round), there looks like there may have been one FPL locking both facing points, but there might have been one for each, if they were too far from each other. The discs on the main line crossovers and down refuge crossover would probably have only shown green with the crossover reversed. The discs either end of the crossover from Up Main to Branch probably/possibly showed green for either lie of the crossover - from Up Main platform either along the Up Main to the northern main line crossover, or onto the branch. From the branch either into the Branch platform or out to the Up Main. The disc on the branch run-round would be green for moves onto the branch proper, but yellow normal, as trains could shunt along the run-round without fouling other lines. If starting from scratch more "properly", a single semaphore would cater for moves from the Up Main platform to the branch and a bracket would only be needed if you also intended to start passenger trains from the Up Main platform to the Down Main, in which case the northern mains crossover would need an FPL at the station end, the far end being trailing. Sorry if it's a bit complicated sounding, I only hope I've got my ducks in a row in the first place! I haven't seen a signal cabin diagram which would explain much.

May be a shunt, but still a train carrying passengers. If there's no facing point lock, then the turnout should be clipped. Starting a passenger train should also be by a running signal.

I take it you mean when heading towards Banbridge, they went to the Down platform first? Could be, although as the station building was on the Up side, it could be they used the south crossover first, then stopped at the Up platform, then used the crossover to access the branch. The GNRI seem to have held a mid-19th century view that the driver should be able to stop short of any obstruction for a long time longer than they should have. There were failures to put alterations up for inspection as they should have, and running passenger trains across turnouts with facing point locks doesn't seem to have bothered them either (think Mountpleasant), just to mention two items. So I should have said that the absence of appropriate signals does not mean things did not happen!

Aside from the flash, there is also a small headboard fitted I think, which would indicate the loco had been used on the "Radio Train".

I'm not sure about the wagon, but there is a section of trackbed still looking like that, with the sloped stone facing, not long after leaving Moyasta heading for Kilrush.

I would suspect the yellow background stuff is an inspection date - C exam, Week 29, 1998 in your sheet (or whenever). The small white lettering is about where the filler is on the fuel tank, so possibly says "Fuel".

I don't know, but the silver pole on the left is distinctive.

Cabin view blocked by water tank sounds like Boyle!

Lovely job this. Re signalling, the layout is similar to Loughrea or Ballinrobe minus one siding. The 1890 practice for those had a working distant (a practice later abandoned), home and starter (the latter on the platform before the fouling point with the loop crossover) and one lever operating the crossover near the tunnel to the loop, the facing point lock and a point detector on the turnout from the loop. A five-lever frame (four working one spare) would easily fit into the type of Railway Signal Co. (the usual MGWR contractors) cabin used at Ballinrobe. Such a cabin might be only 10' wide and 7' long, the dimensions of the 1918 cabin at Loughrea, would be spot on apart from the concrete blocks. Such a building might fit between the water tank and tunnel?

The remaining insulator is damaged, which is perhaps why it remains. The spindles are galvanised, so still fairly rust-free, as is the clamp for the stay wire, although the stay wire itself does not look so good.

That looks like an old-fashioned junction signal. Instead of a bracket, the arms are stacked on the one post. Normally the convention is arms top-to-bottom reads to lines/tracks left-to-right. But, as you say, only one lamp.

Spot on. Moate is a Railway Signal Company (RSCo) design cabin, of a type widely used on the MGWR (and elsewhere in Ireland). The design differs from the McKenzine & Holland (McK&H) cabin (of the Ratio kit) in operating floor windows, gable vents, gable bargeboards and locking room windows, aside from lever frame type. The original operating floor windows of Moate are shown in this photograph https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4305633 "The Signal Box" book (https://www.amazon.com/Signal-Box-Pictorial-History-Designs/dp/0860932249) covers the UK signalling contractors designs, as well as basic terminology, technology and legislation affecting design. If they got contracts, the contractors generally used their then standard designs (or a variant) in Ireland. Unfortunately, the Irish companies own designs are not covered. As Mayner says, the MGWR approach to Civil War damage was to either wholly replace the cabin (Mayner has illustrated Ballywillan, the end windows are replacements) which featured internal stairs, rear lever frames, concrete blocks construction to floor and, most often, RSCo. lever frames. It also appears that a similar design operating floor was used to replace the top of older cabins where the brick base and frame were re-usable. These tended to have external stairs. Multyfarnham is an example.

The square window reflection at Spa suggests one of the first three G's on the train.

Looks like a dead C class behind 186 at Ennis.

The coach next to the one the photographer is in, looks to me like a 1356-71 series CIE built, timber framed coach.

IRM have been very good in supporting the ITG in this way, and the ITG is very grateful to all the staff in IRM for their kindness. The model is selling well, so thank you to all the buyers too, for backing this special edition with their money. Ken Manto, ITG Chairman.

The date looks wrong. The loco looks quite new - no snail casting on the side, sandboxes still fitted, no snatchers, both wipers in place and clean roof.

Yes, the opposite way around to MetroVicks, which are radiator end No.1 and Electrical Cubicles at No.2.

Now don't be upsetting a man who's clearly been enjoying himself. The distant appears to be for trains leaving the terminus, so it must be a gate distant, like the one just off the platform at Rosslare Strand heading for Waterford. Gate distants worked off the gate heels would be off in both directions. Gatekeeper just a bit slow closing the gates after the arriving train.

And they still are!

I think the electrical incompatibility between the NIR and IE stock may have been related as much to different connectors as load. As you say, similar outcome to the Cravens and Mk.2AC. 1991. Is it really that long ago?