BSGSV

1 hour ago, exciecoachbuilder said:

Hi guys, just a quick comment on the coach 1465. That coach was part of the  ' rebuild ' program done in the carriage shop in Inchicore works between 1978/ 79. The only original (1950's) parts that you can see in the photograph , is the roof and the gangway ends of the coach. A lot of the doors were replaced too. The sawmill which was at the time , located within the carriage shop was very very busy in those days.

In the hope you might know, I know Mayner and myself would be interested if you would have any information on whether the original panels used woodfibre or asbestos insulation board (or something else) between the exterior aluminium sheet and the internal veneer? Did the replacements use similar laminated panels, or did the re-builds get done in more traditional coach building manner? Did the original laminate framing also get replaced? Any information would be gratefully received.

Started on 2nd April 1973. The Galway and Westport trains also went over to Athlone - Portarlington to Heuston. Sligo, Rosslare and Dun Laoghaire Pier trains went to Connolly, along with the Galway Mails, except the Galway Night Mail started at Westland Row. Boat trains from Rosslare started running to Limerick rather than Cork. Lots of changes, with associated infrastructure changes beforehand. A full description is given in IRRS Journal No. 61 of June 1973. If memory serves, the timetable only lasted the one year?

The AC sets were all seven-piece, EGV, Super-Standard or Compo, Restaurant, four Standards. Eight sets in service, four on the Cork road (with Super-Standards), one each Tralee, Limerick, Waterford, Galway (with Compo).

The Push-Pulls had started on the Dublin Suburban in February too.

On 2/11/2020 at 9:01 AM, BSGSV said:

I will be following up on JHB's comments re the preserved examples in due course. 

I have looked at 2977 and 2978. An Post's 2977 poses some difficulty, in that the body was re-skinned in preservation, and, given it is in the Carriage Gallery at Downpatrick, scraping away paint is not encouraged! The narrow panels at the inset doors are still original, although only one offered any flaking paint. A flake from the inner edge of the panel had green paint closest to the metal, but could be just paint creeping through a crack, as a flake from the middle of the same panel got down to bare metal with no sign of green beneath the golden brown. 

DCDR's own 2978 offered more scope for samples, and no evidence of green beneath either black or brown. The first coat of B&T seems to have directly on top of the aluminium, with no primer, which would make sense given the aluminium had weathered.

I also noted that as 2978 was next to 1918, that the official width of 10' 5" clearly related to the vehicle with nets. I measured the end of 2978 at 9 ' wide. 

The four-wheel TPO at DCDR was also measured at 9' wide.

On 2/15/2020 at 12:15 AM, Mayner said:

Official records are not always 100% accurate and without a surviving van its impossible to check if the physical dimensions.

Differences often exist between the original concept design and the end result in engineering projects.

I have an "official" drawings of the AEC railcars and a "Beet Double" which are substantially different to ther actual as-built vehicles.

I am inclined to believe that CIE used the original 1935 body design with vertical sides above waist level on a triangulated underframe for the 1959 vans.

The duckets and outward sliding doors are the giveaway that the vans were built to a narrower width, van doors were recessed into the body and guards lookout duckets were not fitted to wider coaches with a teardrop end profile like the Laminate Coaches and heating vans as they would have fouled the loading gauge.

I would agree. The contemporary IRRS and IRN journals, and Kennedy's paper to the IRRS in 1965, all say 61' 6" long. The triangulated underframe was produced by John Thompson Pressings of Wolverhampton, and it seems unlikely a special batch of ten made 60' long would have been produced, just for these vans.

As to the width, the TPO's were 9', so 10' wide for the luggage vans seems odd. http://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000305576 doesn't seem to show much width difference.

Doyle & Hirsch (which presumably quotes official records), also says that 2548 was 10' wide, which also seems strange given the other carriages of 1935 were all 9'.

2 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

Which issue, do you know?

Volume 6, Number 2, April 1960.

Also says the max. load is 6 tons.

Given what the official records show though...

Irish Railfans' News, on introduction, has 2549 - 58 as 61' 6" long and 9' wide.

12 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

I'm not entirely sure that the second carriage is a Craven at all. It is not that clear in the photo. Though what drew my attention to it was wondering what exactly it was.

You're right, not a Cravens with Commonwealth bogies. A laminate in the 1429 to 1448 range, that would have been "silver" when new and looks freshly enough repainted into B&T.

Something along the same line in this link, for those who are group members of Irish Railways Past & Present on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=938113889924658&set=gm.1574808962672456&type=3&theater&ifg=1

47 minutes ago, Mayner said:

Although I fantasized in my youth about a narrow gauge tramway along the road from Lucan to Celbridge, Clane and Sallins , I never realised that Straffan was a major junction with the narrow gauge.

http://catalogue.nli.ie/Search/Results?lookfor=straffan&type=AllFields&page=2&view=list

 

Meh. Straffan. Strabane. Just down the road from each other.

As JHB says, we all make mistakes, and I am very grateful for James O'Dea for taking the photographs and NLI for getting them visible to the rest of us.

9 hours ago, DiveController said:

Amazing job, @flange lubricator, it's the same van!

And here's another, the 2559-2561 trio were modified from GSR built coaches of the 1930s and put into traffic in 1971, same capacity as the others "6 tons evenly distributed", GSR boxes (cf. the O' Dea photo with Commonwealth bogies)

2560, Cork 1982

 

A rare one to see, many thanks. 2559 to 61 converted from 2115, 2120, 2121 corridor compos in early 1971. 2115 was 1935, the other pair 1937, so a change in width between the first and the other pair, the bulge at the waist is easy to see. All 60' long.

The later conversions, 2562 etc., were CIE 1950's composite conversions, some of the composites having been downgraded to all third in the interim, starting in mid-1973. The four wheel tin vans were going fast in the early 70's.

9 hours ago, flange lubricator said:

Again from the wonderful O'Dea collection  parcel van 2554 brand new 'out of the box ' perhaps on trial  1960 so freshly out shopped in green.

http://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000304884

 

Another great spot. Another of the same type behind 2554 as well. They were new then, and still with the Guard's ducket.

7 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

It's important to recall that it was them, rather than Jim O'Dea, who wrote the captions, and they are absolutely riddled with errors.....

James O'Dea did write on the back of his prints, but sometimes the translation to the NLI title can go a bit astray. 

8 hours ago, DiveController said:

You're right @BSGSV. When I spoke above about some obviously being green at some point, I was thinking of the trailing coach in that train which is NOT a 2972-8 series TPO and more likely a full brake which often ran with them. So now having established they ran in the silver livery I'm in search of a photo showing them (bogie TPOs) in green. Some older 6w TPOs ran in green but it's hard to find color pictures of them in either livery in the usual books or online. Search now continues for green.

Thank you for clarifying which photo. As you have surmised, the issue is that the second coach is in green, but is a 2549 series luggage van, not a TPO.

I will be following up on JHB's comments re the preserved examples in due course. 

5 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

In one of O’Dea’s pics above, one is green, the other silver.

Can you clarify if this is the photo you mean, please?  http://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000305576

I'm seeing a dirty aluminium TPO in that.

12 hours ago, flange lubricator said:

Found this picture in the O'Dea collection of G613 at Heuston hauling coaches the first coach behind the loco is I think 1906 commonwealth bogies  you can see the marker light and drivers window at the end  which looks very dirty so it may have become unused at this stage .   I think the date(1962) might be incorrect the craven coaches only arrived in 1963??                                                                                                     http://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000306044 

A narrow side fixed window too, and footsteps on the bogie. Great spot.

None of the photos above shows a CIE built TPO in green in CIE service. Has anyone any evidence that such existed?

I suspect none of the CIE bogie TPO's were green. The O'Dea photos look like they are still in the original silver, and would have gone to black/tan/white next, while the 1968 conversions would have been painted in that from the start.

Mechanical exchange of mails ceased in 1968, and 2979-81 appeared in Nov. 1968, so didn't get nets. They were converted from 2114 (of 1935), 2116/9 (of 1936) so originated under Arthur Harty's time as CME. I suspect some of the sorting frames of 4-wheel TPO's 2962-7 may have been used in the bogie conversions, as 2962-71 were stored out of use at that repository for redundant stock, Sallins, by 1968.

1297 at DCDR today still has one of those GSR bogies with Hoffmann roller bearings.

On 10/11/2019 at 2:58 AM, Mayner said:

 

General Motors had already laid the groundwork in the 1950s re-powering Alco and other less satisfactory diesel locomotives with EMD power units in the United States.

While General Motors locos had a reputation of being reliable and trouble free, Alco and other American loco builders struggled with reliability and maintenance problems similar to the British builders into the late 1950s.

Like the Crossleys early post War Alco diesels suffered from engine problems but had a very good electrical system (possibly an association between GEC (USA) Westinghouse & Metropolitan Vickers).

While CIE retained the existing electrical and control system during the re-builds, the cooling system appears to have been upgraded for the new power units most likely in response to problems experienced  with re-powered locos in the United States.

The cooling systems in the Crossleys had separate engine water and engine oil cooling sections. When rebuilt, an EMD oil cooler was put in (heat exchanger between engine oil and water), so the radiators became all water.  With the increase in engine size, the number of radiator elements on the C class was increased.

The C class retained its load regulator, but got EMD motor field shunt contactors, and various EMD electrical relays, pressure switches and air brake valves. The A got an EMD load regulator.

16 hours ago, leslie10646 said:

I was talking about the Crossleys, of course. The "R" version was a totally different business!

The Blessed Oliver wanted to buy American originally, at least his successors sorted thing out!

I would understand a comment about a lack of power regarding the original C class, but anything I've seen suggests the Crossley A's were able to shift a good load. If they were working! That said, I have no personal experience of the original A's. 

6 hours ago, Mayner said:

Nice modelling and very atmospheric.

I wonder was the signal box re-built with an apex roof by CIE or IE.?

Wicklow signal cabin appears to be the odd man out with Arklow, Gorey and Rathdrum  retaining curved corrugated iron roofs.

 

A nice job, indeed.

I believe the cabin had a fire, sometime in the mid-1960's to early 1970's, and the roof was changed from the normal curved one.  

The short answer is I don't have measurements of the signals - the cabin was still there when I was rambling about, long after the signals themselves had gone. The platform bracket signal seems to possibly be an older one, with new arms, given the "parachute" finials. A photo I have seen indicates that the top of an 80-class passing the signal is about level with the bottom of the shunt signal posts bracketed out lower than the two main signals. You could estimate from that, perhaps?

Sorry, I missed this enquiry earlier. Notes I have say the length of the cabin is 17 feet 9 inches long, by 10 feet 5 inches wide. The extension at the station end under the stairs was 3 feet 9 inches. The operating floor was 8 feet approximately above ground level and 6 feet 6 inches high. Timber front to the operating floor and most of each sides, with brick rear wall. No windows in the base. The odd diagonal "hole" accommodates the end of the girder on which the lever frame is mounted, the girder being supported by the end walls. The lever frame was a Westinghouse A2, 32 levers, 4 inches lever centre to lever centre, mounted at the rear of the cabin. The cabin probably dates from 1932 when the station was resignalled with LMS upper quadrant semaphores, becoming the only location on the island of Ireland with a large number of upper quadrant signals. In latter years, the cabin worked short section to Magheramorne with No.6 Tyer's Tablet and long section to Whitehead with Railway Signal Company key token.

1 hour ago, minister_for_hardship said:

The second Kingscourt signal is a rare bird now, manufactured by Courtney and Stephens iirc, likely made under licence from the Railway Signal Co. and missing its spiky ball final, similar examples were to be seen on former GSWR, CBSCR and Macroom lines up to the Fifties.

Courtney & Stephens (Courtney, Stephens & Bailey) made signals, interlocking frames and cabins on their own account, probably the only Irish contractor to do so. They seem to have later become agents for the Gloucester Wagon Co. (who expanded into signalling to supplement rolling stock construction income) in Ireland. The Railway Signal Co. was a later creation of George Edwards who left the GWCo., along with his patents, and set up on his own account, leading RSCo. material and GWCo. material to have a similar appearance.

3 hours ago, Mayner said:

As far as I know CIE & the GNR (I) never used yellow semaphore arms. Distant signal arms were originally red throughout the UK, yellow may have been introduced on the British mainland at some stage after the the 1923 grouping.

The GNR(I) converted all distants to yellow on a line by line basis (in the early 1940's if memory serves), including those south of the border. CIE repainted some back to red! NCC and BCDR also used yellow distants.

It depends on the time period of the model. Timber square post signals would have been very common, all over, 100 years ago. There was a fair amount of lattice post signals, particularly on the DSE. The GNR seem to have used the telegraph pole in their later years, as an economy measure, as they don't seem to feature in earlier photos (but someone's bound to prove me wrong on that now). There was a small number of concrete post signals. The GSR introduced tubular metal signals and CIE continued, so with renewals, these became most common on CIE lines.