DiveController

Suggested wire sizes for the main bus(es) under the layout would be 14-16 AWG. For n, droppers(feeders) 22AWG to 24AWG. If the layout is large err on the larger side (less resistance in larger bore wire=less drop in voltage over longer distances). Solid wire recommended especially for feeders avoids electrical problems with stray strands. Voltage drop is proportional to the length of the rail. Most voltage drop occurs across joiners (narrow cross-section) so ideally each track piece should have a feeder. A feeder should be placed near the centre of the rail rather than near the joiner(distance from each dropper to either end is half as long)

I seem to recall some members mentioning that 201s did double head on rare occasions, and certainly a coupling was buckled on one occasion due to the combined tractive effort

PM sent

It's late here, Noel but since no-one has been on as yet, I know that Mayner usually recommends the the etches are fitted to the side of the donor with only the space between the window themselves removed, with the top an bottom left in place to fit to the chassis and roof. He suggests gluing the roof for stability and have the entire thing removable from the chassis. His are designed for a Dapol kit which is a scale 60' which is not the usual 61'6" frame standard on almost all of CIEs 1950s built stock except the very first few composites. Scale 60' coaches required, I think. The tumblehome would be whatever is on the donor coach. NZ will be awake shortly I'm sure

PM Sent

Full power, Tony, balls to the wall!

What could be more entertaining that an exhibition of the quintessential irish railway ... and you don't have to entertain in the Kingdom both days surely?

FCUK'd by another online site. I was wondering where the original BUT car photos had gone to the other night. In discussion before we highlighted the option of "storing a local copy" which you can click on when uploading so it is actually stored on the IRM site servers. Many threads have had their photos disappear when the original folders are rearranged or renamed online even when the host doesn't disappear. I expect the motivation for Dropbox was to get rid of high volume data types to allow it to continue to offer services without having to host huge data volumes associated with photos. A terrible shame but nothing you can do at this point

I know you expressed some reservations about the size when you were planning. I suppose some prefer to run trains and personally I prefer to do that. Obviously you also like to model as evidenced by the high quality of the layout and associated structures so far. If you move to N, you'll certainly fit more in and have room to do more shunting but will you be happy with that another end-end on a smaller scale in the same space? Can the OO gauge layout be extended to create a circuit with helices (maybe impossible in the space still?) or round the room at some arbitrary level that might pass over the furniture allow the room to continue to function? Summer house? Well insulated outside shed, although watch the damp? It a lovely layout and maybe a break from the intense pace will help. I think of mine as a ten year project (more than two years on this site and I have nothing to show for it)!

Jeepers, any photos of these anywhere?

As you know neither really resembles the broad 5'3" gauge since its 16 mm between the rails but the height of the Code 100 rail is oversized. The code 75 appears more to scale and 75/1000" would equate to just over 6" for the prototype (if I've done my maths correctly). Does that sound right for the height of the prototypical rail?

Really like those, Kieran. Superb job!

Double scores, convincing win

I'd take a pair for the GNR, Leslie

It's probably just a clogged rod in need of maintenance. Maintenance always better done before they have to jumpstart you with a 300A decoder. Get well soon!

HI John, I'll commit to one of these and work on skills to build it in the meantime!

Looks completely prototypical, what's the problem again?

PMs sent

Is it possible it's just out of gauge and can be corrected with a back to back, or should it be the middle axle on the bogie, maybe reassembled incorrectly after servicing the loco?

He closed the store on Christmas Eve 2016 but the website is still up and running. He hasn't declared whether or not he plans continue to sell on line but may be selling off the existing stock. Anything that has sold out does not seem to have come back into stock

I think you're right, Richie. I couldn't find a photo of the 3213-3218 series GSV (1978). This seems to be 3216TL and they were built from earlier coaches, likely the 2130-2136 series composites CIE built 'laminate' stock. These were the first composites to be built on the longer 61'6" chassis whereas the 2124-2129 were on the earlier 60' chassis. However, I'm not certain of that. The vans apparently ran on GSR bogies and were only 9'6" wide so it's possible they were converted from something even older although I don't know if anything prior to that had a 61'6" chassis. If anyone has any info on this, I'd be interested to hear. Many thanks for that photo, Richie!

I have neglected to renumber, repaint or weather mine (yet) but they would not look grossly out of place mixed in with some of Leslie's wagons either

It's a bit grainy but a TPO would be the most likely (although it looked like it may have some exhaust equipment on the roof).

Shush! .....(please, no:praying:)

Some of the cravens had a guards compartment fitted with a vacuum brake gauge which could also be used for this purpose and had a Train Line Brake (TLB)