jhb171achill

Believe me, Midland Man, when you're on the footplate of an engine in motion, you barely notice it!

I'll take them tomorrow and post them. I'll be working in there at some stage during the day probably. He has one of the same set also in GSR maroon. For some reason, none of his MGWR models are in the standard MGWR coach brown. The blue and white looks a lot better of course, but it never reached the vast majority of the fleet at all, and was very short-lived on those which were painted thus. The MGWR maroon livery, used 1918-25, was a very dark shade, much darker than GSR.

Let them finish the “A”s first, Leslie... priorities!

Mighty mighty stuff........ might order that one too!

Modellers will notice that as in grey days, sometimes the cab interior was the same colour as all of the engine instead of some combination of light brown and cream, as used by most companies on most locos. here, the late CIE all-black includes an all-black cab interior!

Superb, Galteemore! Just right for SLNCR. It was one of the last 6-wheelers in regular use, getting a decent repaint as late as the early 50s, by which time paintbrushes had become foreign objects in all areas of the SLNCR, from signal posts to carriages! It seems to have been a very cheap-and-nasty job, though, possibly with no proper preparation of the surfaces, as by closure the coach was in an abominable state cosmetically.

The biggest "missing link" is something Midland, so I'd go for a large MGWR 4.4.0. I am sure that all of us here could also add to a list of wishes regarding a "new build", just as it is all too easy to generate a list on this forum of what new RTR model or kit we would all like - certainly, I have many preferences. However, in all such things, practicalities must come first. Even if there were still unrestored steam engines lying about, there would be at least one of which it could be said that only a madman would think of resurrecting it. This might be due to the weight of it, the absolute impracticality of it being of the slightest use - for example, too small for the main line, too big for Downpatrick, and no room in Cultra! certainly, if all of the 33 engines mentioned initially were all still in existence, there is not even the slightest likelihood that all but low single numbers of them would EVER be restored - and even now, it is likely that at least some would be scrapped. The reality, as I learned well in 25 years of looking after preservation bodies' finances, is that we can't preserve everything, and only a fool would try. Model makers may well (yes, you know who you are!) have their own personal, private lists of what they would like to make available commercially, but the thing has to sell in numbers sufficient to recoup the very significant five-figure sum which has to be coughed up IN ADVANCE of even one being made. But, for new builds and models - even for restoration of scrapheaps on wheels lying in hopefulness at ALL of our preservation sites - we may have our preferences, and there's nothing wrong with dreaming, but best to keep feet on ground at the same time! My idea, as above, for a MGWR 4.4.0 would be ideal in utopia, but of no more use than 171 restored. Thus, the effort is better going into 171. And here we come to the crunch. In steam days, turntables and steam servicing facilities were in every station and junction. Now they are almost non-existent, and anywhere a steam loco goes, great efforts have to be made to deal with it. Turntables - just think - there are but half a dozen left, most no longer operable. Dublin begins and ends the list in the south; Coleraine and Whitehead in the north. NIR would have none - but the RPSI owns the latter two. Then we've a couple of triangles - Limerick Jct. and Gt. Victoria Street - timetable paths permitting. What the RPSI needs is not the romance of more 4.4.0s, much as I hate to say it, but the cold, hard practicalities of tank engines. Most Irish railways used tender engines for main line trains. We have not only got few tank engines left, but even among the world of "new builds" there is little suitable. No. 4, even though for me personally, it was always my least favourite engine, is the most practical - it does not NEED a turntable! THAT is the future! The Sligo tank, "Lough Erne", is useless for longer distance main line trips, even if rebuilt (which it would need in entirety). A new-build BCDR 4.6.4T would be useless for today's conditions. A "Bandon Tank" would be useless for today's conditions. None of the GSWR types would do either. Not one. Thus, a second "Jeep" is by far the most practical option for any new build. A "Mogul" will still be a tender engine, but while it might add a bit of glamour, it won't put one euro more into the coffers than another Jeep would have done. However, with added "X" factor, it also has very many parts, even the boiler, which are interchangeable with No. 4; thus it's a good option for a new-build. Our dreams are best kept that way; mine, of a train of gas-lit non-corridor MGWR & GSWR six-wheelers on the main line, is about as useful as a chocolate teapot!

I wouldn't be surprised if there's something preserved in England from the LNWR which would assist, comparison-wise, with a "new build"!

Yes, that's correct. Hard to know which are in the photo, as the plates have been taken off.

The NRM in York has a full set of Click's pictures of it being built. Very detailed and very technical, but essential for anyone who really wants absolute chapter and verse on it. You have to visit the place and get a researcher to help you - it's not online.

Yes, there was indeed talk of preserving one. I believe No. 6 was considered for some reason now unknown, but it ended up being No. 1. This was too early for the Belfast Transport Museum, so I assume that it was the GNR who planned to preserve it. Shame it didn't happen; an ideal beast to operate at Downpatrick! I think I remember hearing that it was broken up in error.

Technically, they weren't put aside for preservation. They were a "strategic reserve" intend to deal with a possible major breakdown in the new dieselisation programme. They were always intended for scrap once officialdom was 100% happy with all aspects of the new diesel programme, thus the advent of the 121s and 141s sealed their fate. They only scheduled a very few for actual preservation: J15 184 & 186 (Now RPSI) K2 461 (Now RPSI) GNR 131 (Now RPSI) J30 90 (Now DCDR) GSWR 36 (IE, Cork station) GSR 800 (UFTM, Cultra) The latter, 800, was initially scheduled for scrap, but was reprieved following representations by those who had a bit of wit! The MGWR is missing from the above. CIE consider saving a G2 as well, but no particular one was picked, and before any arrangements could be made they were all broken up. I have also heard it suggested that 464, the last "Brandon Tank" was under consideration as well, but this may be wishful thinking on the part of Cork area railway management at the time, and enthusiasts subsequently, as no evidence of such a plan exists. All the other locos were never meant to kept long term, and while the very last of them turned its last wheel in traffic in March 1963, a few (by this time long derelict) were technically only written off in 1965.

The Great Southern green was a different shade entirely CIE green - and was only applied to the three 800s, which only wore it for five or six years before getting CIE green after 1945. Due to the fuel shortage, they weren't even seen out and about much WITHIN that five or six years. Everything else the GSR had was always grey in pre-CIE times. The only example surviving of the actual green paint is on two of Cyril Fry's models in Malahide. Ironically, though, the actual GSR paint is on two models of DIFFERENT classes of loco, which were grey! And his model of 800 is in CIE green.... At some stage I will try to colour-match this paint on these engines so that a RAL number can be ascertained.

I’ve just had half a packet of choccy bikkies, the effect it’s having on me.

For me, a silver one, a green and a plain black. I am preparing a submission for funding to the Dept. of Domestic Expenditure, Matching Curtains and Household Matters for a black-with-yellow and a black’n’tan as well..... The really BIG issue is weathering. In all reality, anything with a Crossley engine in it was inevitably filthy! Genuinely, I’d be looking for a highly professional weathering job on the silver one, but it would have to be to a very high standard to do the model justice.

In all seriousness, has any other manufacturer EVER gone to this much trouble inside cabs?

Whaaaaat!!! It's even got the fire extinguisher INSIDE THE DRIVER'S CAB!!!!!!! Words just don't describe this production. Absolutely superb. Lads, you'll be telling me there's real diesel in the tanks next, and a bag of taytos and an Indo on the driver's desk in cab 2!

Superb stuff, DC! Interesting pointwork. The cattle dock doesn't seem so busy by this stage - early 50s?

It looks to be within the confines of the tram depot, given the spiked track, light rail, and distance from the footbridge. But I was unaware of any platform like that within the tram depot. Hard to imagine the Howth branch without litter and high-security fencing! And there's railcar "F", which the UTA bought a few years later for the Warrenpoint branch. There's a model of it on display in Malahide now........ There was also a lovely model of it built by Brendan Kelly, which ran in the castle. Such was Brendan's great workmanship, I got it mixed up with Fry's model for a while......

Then that's it, Ernie - excellent stuff! So the pic is when that trio were taken there for scrapping. It is therefore likely that one of them is indeed no. 6.

Mid 1950s, ex-Dundalk, Newry & Greenore engines. All three numberplates are off, so we can't tell which ones. One might be No. 6, "Holyhead", which Cyril Fry got a name and numberplate off - they are now on display in Malahide. I suspect Sutton, yes, though I can't place the concrete-faced platform. Definitely a GNR footbridge, but Sutton's covered two tracks, and that footbridge does seem a bit longer. As Lambegman says, I don't recall either seeing a pic of Sutton FB being covered. The pic above of the railcar there in 1957 shows it isn't, but the DNGR closed in 1951, so it might have been then. Unless we can establish that Sutton's WAS covered in, say, 1952, but this was later removed, then it's NOT Sutton. If it is not Sutton, the only places it could possibly be are somewhere the locos would have been en route to be scrapped in Dublin. Is it possible they went for onward transit to Dublin via Goraghwood? It had a covered FB. Otherwise Dundalk, but I'm sure that's not Dundalk station. It's not Drogheda either.

That is Ballyboley Junction, yes. The pic (looking south) appears to be taken from the signal cabin, the only building left at that stage - they had removed even the platform, which was to the right of the train. A pity, as it was a very picturesque station in a scenic area - a perfect setting for a compact narrow gauge junction. The trackbed of the B & L Rly's main line is seen to the right - obviously, the train is entering what had been the Doagh branch, though by this stage it only went as far as Ballyclare. A superb and very unusual view. That looks to be the case, Old Blarney. A highly unusual view. I was aware that one of those later two-car sets became railcar intermediates for a VERY short while - I think less than two years in use, but I had never seen a picture of them. I assume that there was no gangway between each outer car and the 2-car Drumm in between, as photos of them before scrapping show the original cabs still there, albeit without drivers' gubbins inside.

Absolutely, Hexagon, I get you now; apologies for misunderstanding. While I have no records of what you are looking for, I may be able to dig something up. I’ll make a couple of phone calls tonight. Personally, though, I certainly recall catering vehicles in or near the middle of formations on at least some occasions when I travelled in the summers of 79, 80 & 81.

If we go back that far, there was absolutely no set way of making up train formations as such. Even the new Mk 2 sets, which were the first to be standard trains of only one vehicle type, could vary. The sort of standard sets of today simply weren't the thing at all. Non Mk 2 sets were a total mix, as the inclusion of off-duty dining cars illustrates. Mixtures of Cravens, Park Royals and all manner of different variations of laminates - some in original condition, others maybe rebuilt substantially more than once in only 15 years, were on all types of services. For the modeller, the good thing is that variety was the norm.

THREE!!! Wow - that was certainly scraping the barrel!