DiveController

Is that the hard-mounted in-the-cab version? There was also one on a shoulder strap that spewed out purplish inky tickets when I was a lad and buses still had conductors!

Hi David, that would be nice but I have a feeling that unfortunately the body on that one is a custom job already. Otherwise, while not up to your caliber, would still have a go. Yes, if MM landed have a dozen 121 liveries in the morning, I'd buy one of each. I'm sure they'll be beautiful if they come, just not sure when Thanks for that, Noel. Not as slow as your usual MM 071 vs. 141 challenge but certainly an adequate runner. Would be interested to see how that performs on DCC. Seems pretty smooth otherwise. I think it's a 21pin PnP DCC chassis but report back if you would if you're able to DCC her Looked up the Brawa, Ed. Wasn't aware of it before your post. What would the advantage be? I have never seen one run (that I'm aware of)

I must have missed a couple of pages of the SSM Sulzer Kit thread as really busy coming up to Christmas. Thanks for that, Patrick! That's encouraging, warning duly noted:tumbsup: I think most of the Brazilian heavy rail lines are 5'3" and narrow gauge at 3' 3"3/8. I think that's exactly what it is, a lowered cabbed version. I think ALL (América Latina Logística) the Brazilian logistics company have the closest to the 121 (high cabbed), but on US freight bogies, I think. I'm not aware that this was ever modeled The Athearn SW1500 chassis would be much better in the last 3-4 years. The chassis itself would be HO or 1:87 so if over scale that would be o my advantage. Wasn't sure if you were referring to the MIR whitemetal side frame castings which may be over scale, by all reports

The Tension lock couplers can be hit and miss. There can be problems with smooth coupling as well as unintended uncoupling since the hook has to rise to couple and hold in a vertical height of about a millimeter. I've had some problems with brand new stock out of the box on occasion if the coupler height isn't perfect. When you say slight gradient what are we talking about? It may be that at the bottom or top of a gradient, at the transition point, the loco or coaches change their orientation relative to each other, one is level, one on the incline, causing uncoupling. Also any areas of imperfect track, points etc. usually worse on tighter (or any) curves. What locos, stock?

Edited by warbonnet due to a truckload of spoilers.

G, thanks for your reply. I have a sneaking suspicion that your SW1500 is going to be the best option but since I don't see the 121s being available inside a couple of years at least for various reasons (all principally economic in one way or another) I'm exploring others. EMD exported the GL8 in various modified forms to several countries including Brazil which took the lion's share. All (except GA8s) seem to have had the same export bogies similar to the 121 class. The Brazilian model maker, Frateschi also produced a 1:87 scale model with bogies that appear relatively finescale and prototypically correct. I'm not sure about the axle boxes but they don't look bad and may even be correct. My main concern with this is that I don't know much about the running qualities of the model which would be important. I'm also not sure that it has any directional running lights or is DCC ready (or even compatible) Another concern would be that it's under scale at 1:87 not only the bogies as would be with the SW1500 but would also be physically not long/wide enough for the MIR OO scale kit (which is why I was looking for some specs on the 121 above) Most importantly if someone has any experience with Frateschi running qualities could you please post or PM me Thanks!

Would anyone happen to have the dimensions of the 121 to hand for comparison with the SW1500 chassis please?

I probably could but I simply don't want you to be strung up or banned by a Moderator for making blasphemous suggestions. I do have enough MM141/181s that I could sacrifice one but would I do it for something that looks like it was dipped in an orange chocolate fountain and not exactly fine scale. I'd probably feel obliged to butcher the body to add finely detail parts to the MIR:confused:

Hmm, I was told by someone that had built a kit that the white metal sideframes didn't suit the SW1500 chassis but I forgot to ask why I found some spec on the prototypical SW1500 switchers on a US website. I suspect that the SW1500 has been used as it was/maybe still is the closest to the 121 EMD SW1500 Switcher Engine Builder: EMD Engine: 645E 12 cylinder Speed: 65 mph Trucks: 4-Wheel Configuration: B-B Quantity Built: 807 Dates: 7/1966 to 1/1974 Total Length 44'-08" Wheel Diameter 40" Truck Wheel Base 8'-00" Center Bolster 22'-00" Center Front Truck to Front Pilot 2'-04" Center Rear Truck to Rear Pilot 2'-04" Distance between Truck Centers 30'-00" Now to search for some on the 121

Thanks for the advice. I had a look at prototypical Southern Pacific SW1500 switchers and found some good photos of the bogies / trucks. The 121 has bogies like 134 seen here at Dublin And the Southern Pacific like these The Athearn model has the same bogies as the SW prototype It may be that the bogies are similar but the side frames are not

Haven't travelled that in a while, Noel. Many seem to favor the motorways now. I suppose some sections of one line 21 years after the statement was made is progress.

Yes, I think the lower edge is in on the horizontal but they seem to slope away to the side at least in these

They're often out of stock on item. Nice bargain though

I suspected there was a reason such as this and this makes lot of sense. Our 'representatives' have been pretty good at finding ways to dispose of entrusted funds over the years with little or no return on the 'investment'. GM probably thought it was a great PR stunt for them too, with the focus on cutover satisfaction (but unlikely they footed any part of the bill). As Stephen points out the class is now subtotally shelved, so we can 'save' money on newer traction and coaching stock. The MkIIIs had half a lifetime too bar the few to be resurrected in Scotland.

Ivan, I looked at your kit and the photos again and, honestly, the windows shapes appear to look the same. I understand you're striving for perfection but you're also going to have to fit the kit windows into any space you create unless you're going to customize them.

As there is presently no rtr 121 Class locomotive available from any manufacturer, I am considering completing a MIR 121 kit and mounting it on a modern chassis. Ideally, the chassis would have to be at least DCC ready with a view to potentially putting a decoder/sound decoder in this at some point. I would also like the chassis to be equipped with directional lighting from the outset if possible. Most importantly the chassis should be a modern chassis with excellent operational qualities, and good slow running speed. Previously the Athearn SW1500 switcher seems to have been a popular or necessary choice. However, these did not necessarily run to the standard we have no come to expect. As I understand in more recent years (maybe around 2011 or 2012), Athearn upped its game and improved its SW chassis to include a modern 5-pole skew wound motor with flywheels and all-wheel pickup on it B-B switchers. There is a bewildering variety of new SW1500 switchers out there so I am uncertain about which ones meet these requirements. While trying to research the subject I also realized that some of the switchers have different trucks/bogies, some being AAR A-type, B type or Flexicoil bogies. Since the MIR kit side frames seems not to be compatible with the Athearn chassis I would like to select one with bogies that most closely resembles the 121 class locomotive. If anyone has used more modern SW1500 switchers by Athearn or another manufacturer, I would be grateful for any advice you can offer. If anyone can offer any advice on the bogies, this may help me to narrow down the road names that I might be looking for as a donor. Any specific recommendations are also very welcome. Many thanks

Nope and the Euro rate stills sucks, so maybe as well for now

The central window would be RECTANGULAR but instead of being vertically orientated would be in a plane that tilts toward the locomotive (from bottom to top) as the 'flat' lower front of the locomotive angles backwards at about waist height in the cab (kinda like any car windscreen, (if it were flat)) However, it looks like the lower centre of the cab of the only part that is vertical and perpendicular (vertically and transversely) to the long axis of the locomotive. It looks like each side, right and left of the center front panel also angles towards the locomotive (from centrally to the side). The distance between the central and side window frames appears to remain constant between (say,) the top and bottom. Hence, (while remaining parallel to the centre window edges, from the front and angling away from the central window on each side) the non-central windows are not parallelograms but QUADRANGULAR in shape. The tops and bottoms of these windows are parallel to each other and only the central side of them is parallel to the central window vertical edges. Now, if theres a curve on these panels, everything I just said is wrong for the non-central windows. So hopefully whoever designed the kit also came to the same conclusions. And since the corners are rounded all these shapes are approximate While all of this might be evident on the prototype, I doubt you would appreciate it scaled down 76 times, so it's likely the window will appear as a rhomboidal parallelogram with rounded corners (side are unequal length), not a rhombus (equal) Sorry, I may have driven you completely mad now

Roll on the beloved ICRs What was also interesting was the comment form John McCarthy that they would operate at 100mph …… Oh, wait, you'd need appropriate infrastructure for that. Anyway that said, it was a record-breaking heavy-lift operation. I wonder how much time was saved and money spent to speed up the order? I can't help wonder if the order had been submitted a few weeks sooner, whether there would have been a need to airlift her at all or whether GM's factory at London, ON was the limiting factor?

If your modeling is better (or seems better to you) while inebriated, then have a Happy New Year and happy modeling! (TYPO Fixed above 12 Days OF Christmas)

=)) A bit late, Dave but appreciated! Optional?……. Is that the new urban slang for essential? Otherwise your post is 'phat' and 'sick' …...hope I'm not breaching the forum rules on the (mis)use of the 'English' language 12 days OF Christmas, Rich (then follows sobriety, for an indeterminate period) You're still in time Merry Christmas!

Same, Tom. Sorry

Gotta agree with Weshty here. I'm subscribed to this thread so been waiting patiently for an update. Definitely worth the wait. l remember that skew bridge from my childhood and the model's really perfect. Even the steps beneath. I think all the superlatives have been used. You should be very proud of that:drool:

Child's play for you, Eoin. Didn't even need the high-amp cutter gizmo! Wish the models were all that easy:D Happy Christmas, guys!

This is the sum total of my modeling efforts for today, Christmas Eve. I'm calling it the gatekeepers cottage since it was a joint effort between me and what I hope will be the next generation of railway modeller presently aged four years old! Upstairs are "Dad's trains" (which can be taken for a spin on a couple of DC loops, and treated with the utmost respect) and 5'x3' play table covered with Thomas the Tank Engine tracks, stations, and engines!