jhb171achill

But will it be weathered and RTR?

I notice among it a pic of several coach ends at Whitehead..... in case anyone's indexing, the badly faded wooden coach between the CIE and RPSI Mk 2s is an NCC bogie full parcel brake, used as a stores van there.

Absolutely correct, Minister. To add, in fact, to the drabness was the fact that they actually changed little at first anyway, as the grey had already been used by the GSWR for some eight years, and the dark "lake" maroon - which weathered to almost black in some cases - added to dirty black wagons on the GSWR, and very dark grey on the DSER and MGWR - must have looked VERY gloomy. The attractive lined maroon of WLWR locos was long gone by 1925; such locos were either in faded GSWR black or more likely all grey already since the GSWR takeover of that concern two decades earlier. So the new GSR picked the company with the dullest livery of the lot - the GSWR - and slapped that all over everything else! The narrow gauge lines - most of whose locos were varying shades of lined green - the DSER with its handsome lined black, and the MGWR with its even more attractive lined emerald green.....

All very valid points indeed, Mayner. The GSR was indeed very adept at penny counting; jhb171's senior and senior/senior both would have told us that. Regarding the CDR, it went bust in the 1920s and it was the financial input of the GNR (locos / rolling stock) and NCC (track / infrastructure) which kept it afloat. The LLSR, by comparison, withered. In reality, it is an absolute miracle that much of the network in remote Donegal was ever built at all, and an even bigger one that the LLSR lasted until recently, even as a bus company operating ICRs - sorry, buses. (Or is it the other way round?). Connemara is similar to Donegal. Imagine if that region had had 200 miles of 3ft gauge lines serving places like Roundstone, Rossaveal or Cong, instead of a single Clifden branch which closed in 1935? The Congested Districts Board and Balfour Acts saw that all of the above were built. In reality, the chances of ANY of those lines being economically viable as standalone businesses (as railways were then) was nil. Thankfully, they WERE built, and we enthusiasts got to enjoy them - if old enough - or enjoy the pictures if not.

That's quite possible indeed, Dive - I hadn't thought of that. However, also, they did tend to get very dirty! The green livery - like all single-colour liveries - tended to look dull if worn or weathered. After almost twenty years of all-encompassing green or grey, the new black'n'tan livery looked very bright, modern and dynamic when new.

That's the one I was on back from Caaark tonight.....

Aaaarrrrrghhh! I'm on an ICR right now.....

WOW!!!!!! You've surpassed yourself (again), Leslie!

Yes, folks, it is indeed on the DCDR. The coach was just ex-service and had just arrived there.

Exactly, Dhu Varren, that's what I had in mind.

True!!

It was fine till you commented, Harry! ;-)

See if this works the right way up.... Ah well.

Gorey, 1989.

Yes. I threatened my iPad with a run in a 29000. It worked.

Note: original NIR logo as applied to some Jeeps (50, 4 and one or two others), all railcars and loco-hauled coaches, Hunslets plus these things - gold, lined in white. The double lining along the bodyside, however, is the same very pale grey as used on their railcar livery (not white). And this is what you'd see them pulling.

The very last few TPO vehicles in traffic - maybe only this one, in fact - got the one lower "tippex" line same as the BR vans did.

Just an update on the headlights thing. Here we can see two pictures of an "A" in green. If anyone ever makes these locos RTR (no rumours, please!), they'd need to include the headlights only with supertrain and later liveries. It was the same with the "C"s, and same in "black" and "black with yellow end" days; "C" class modellers alert.... And on the subject of.... these beasts never had the big double headlights at all, in any livery: 121s always had the large headlights - in fact they were the first locos to carry them, a standard American design. The success of these led to their introduction on all subsequent locos. Initially these matched the body colour - grey with grey livery, black with B'n'T livery, but once "supertrain" livery appeared, they were to be painted white and remain that way into IE livery times, until withdrawal. But BEWARE, O Pilgrim. This is where eyewitness accounts of liveries will always set aside completely discussions about how things look different in photos, therefore there must have been loads of different shades of this, that and the other, blah blah blah..... While everything in "supertrain" livery had WHITE headlights, sometimes dirt / weathering made them look different in photos. I've often quoted the common (and to an oul fogey like me, quite irritating) proliferation of black ironwork on wagons, when the reality was it was rust showing black in an old photo! Here, we see two "A"s, both with white lamps. But one is so dirtied that in a photo it almost looks the same black as the cab it's attached to. Related: "The GNR just went down to the local paint shop to get blue paint, so the were many shades of blue on GNR locos" "There were myriad shades of CIE green" "There were myriad shades of wagon grey" "There were myriad shades of CIE / IE orange/tan" All incorrect. All wrong. Some defined variations at certain times (with the exception of the always consistent GNR blue) but not myriads. Not a haphazard difference from one item thus painted to the next.

Well, both BnM and Luas did eventually! The MGWR bought the Royal Canal when building the line to Mullingar to save land acquisition costs, and wipe out competition at the same time. Clever move back in the 1840s....

Tis very true, Weshty! And I'd be in the seat behind you whinging about AEC railcars, Bandon tanks, and No 90! ;-) ....But I WOULD be IN that seat.....!

Gregory Campbell could translate, maybe....

Correct, minister. As a parallel but separate issue is the fact that it does seem fairly clear that official standards are lacking - or else the public's perception is. Both have one common denominator - the education system. Either teach it correctly and effectively, or give it up....

They absolutely weren't, Minister! While the GSR was still solvent and a private company, it was clear that things weren't getting any better for them financially, and the government gave them little option. Obviously, they also took over the Dublin United Tramways Co., though this WAS solvent. Sometimes governments can put pressure on private companies without actually taking them over. However, the GSR directors apparently were being convinced that by taking on these two other entities, all might be good....

All railways got a share of a compensation fund, the GSWR included. It's important to remember that the funding requested by railways back then was always intended to be one-off, as the concept of state ownership of railways didn't figure anywhere. Railways were private companies, in which investors were able to buy shares and get paid dividends. A bit like telecoms companies today, or chemical companies. They were run for profit first, provision of service second. It was only when road transport started eating into profits, ultimately making them financially unviable, that ONGOING state aid was sought. And that wasn't until thirty years after the GSWR had ceased to exist. Remember the GSR wasn't a UTA or CIE style amalgamation - it was a private company amalgamation. The GSR remained as a private company throughout its existence, and even CIE was formed in the same circumstances. CIE was formed in 1945, but it wasn't nationalised until 1950, as it became clear that it was no longer financially viable as a business model. The births of both the GSR and CIE were intended to capitalise on the concept of economy of scale, rather than stave off actual bankruptcy. In the case of CIE, the Grand Canal Conpany was financially insecure though. (I've got financial stuff of theirs somewhere in the Catacombs). Within each constituent company, there would have been PARTS that lost money - eg within the MGWR the Achill, Killala and Clifden lines - but overall these companies made money and paid dividends. Within the GSWR, it's likely that some remote branches like Kenmare were an overall drain on resources, but were cross-subsidised by the more profitable parts of an overall solvent business.