Noel

Close coupling tests on setrack. I was asked over on the FB site how the recoupled coaches might perform on setrack curves. I don't have any setrack on the layout, but had some in the attic from old train sets which I set up for tests. MM Mk2 coaches with the Hornby R8220 close couplings performed incredibly well on 1st, 2nd and 3rd radius setrack curves. No buffer locking. See pics below. The MM Mk2 with alternate kadee no 20 and 19 at each end were OK on 2nd and 3rd radius but buffer lock on sharp 1st radius curves. The Cravens were fine with the short Kadee on 3rd radius push or pull, but on 2nd radius when pulling ok but buffer lock when pushing. Probably because I used the shortest kadee possible. With longer kadee the 2nd radius would have been OK for cravens. No chance on 1st Radius with the short kadee's. So my personal conclusion is Hornby R8220 or Roco 40270 close couplings can cope with anything and provide excellent close coupling, and kadee's ok with mk2 stock on 2nd and 3rd radius. These close couplers should work well for fixed rake coach formations. These tests were only between adjacent coaches only. For loco to coach coupling you may need longer kadee no 19 or 20 between loco and first coach on 2nd radius curves.

'Au Revoir' met.ie old web site on the 18th. It has served well for many years, was concise and visually effective. One of the first to incorporate an animated rain fall radar which was one of the sites best features. The all new singing all dancing met.ie web site launches later this week. It has tons of visual data.

Craven Kadee conversion continues. Photos below of stock being tested for vertical alignment, spacing, and running trails both pull and push around curves and over points. Kadee on Craven below is now lining up correctly with MM 141 loco (no 19 on loco, with DIY adapter and no 17 under coach). The two white plastic adapters are clearly visible. These will get a coat of sleeper grime once further running trials have completed. Closer than with the standard TLCs. I didn't want to use Hornby/Roco close couplers on the Cravens because they will be frequently marshalled and shunted into varying coach formations containing Park Royals, Laminates, Bredins, and all manner of vans such as GSVs, TPO, HLV, etc. PS: @jhb171achill I hope the 'men in black' pics above will go someway toward exonerating me from my temporary encounter with the modernity of mk2 oranges and 'yellow fever'.

Thanks, that's useful to know. Just ordered a rake of Tara's with that Payment Method.

Yipee - Craven Kadee height problem solved. I tried all manner of Kadee's this evening, long, short, medium, underset, overset, centerset shanks, etc, even No 5's but in the end the simplest solution proved the best. A home made adapter using no 17s. Glue shortened Kadee no 17s to a DIY plasticard NEM shaft (12mm x 3mm). First remove the nibbles from the end of the tongs (i.e. shorten the no 17 by 2mm). Then plug this adapter into the existing Craven NEM pocket. Option to fit using friction only, or small screw through the NEM pocket to secure.

Hi Eoin Yes I did thanks. I would prefer to match the kadee height gauge reasonably correctly on my Cravens because they will be mixed and marshalled with other coaches so they will all need to be the correct height for kadee's. In your two photos below the couplings only vertically overlap the loco or height gauge by 50%, which can pose problems on gradient changes, etc, with unplanned decoupling, but otherwise your workaround should work ok for folk who don't need the trip pins close enough to function as uncouplers over magnets, etc. I will be experimenting with other kadee gearbox sets over the next few days in case some of them can be glued directly under the craven NEM pocket to give the correct height. This could remove the need for me to cut away any of the NEM pocket and therefore be a very quick and efficient fix. Noel

It was a good call. Nearly every customer who bought a rake of ballasts should be a prospect for a pair of these so you know the numbers. You've even convinced me despite my 'yellow fever' paranoia. I'm sure these will sell out quickly once all your existing ballast customers find out about them.

So far back on Cravens even the longest no 20 kadee won't even work. Agree its very inconvenient that some manufacturers fail to apply the NEM-362 standard. The MM Cravens are rightly much applauded, but IMHO they were let down by two issues, the dayglo blue seating colour and non-standard NEM pockets positioned at an incorrect height, incorrect horizontal position relative to the buffers and the pockets are not even the correct length. One should not have to make such elementary changes to an RTR model costing €49. I'm about to convert our Cravens to kadee so hopefully by trial and error will discover the simplest method of conversion. I'm not prepared to use the existing pockets because they are the wrong height, they will part couple after modifications but only 50% engagement between the couplings is not acceptable due height differential. Gluing under the NEM pockets like the Mk2 won't work because the kadee will be too low, so its either cut the bottom surface off the MM pockets, put a fillet where the tongs should be and glue no 20s onto that, or alternatively cut the bottom surface off the NEM pocket and glue kadee 141 or 146 gearbox sets to that. Yes its worth the effort, especially for B&T era mixed coaching stock where shunting and marshalling was common operational practice, and even more so for 2 axle pick up goods wagons that were shunted on and off passing trains in every small station in Ireland. That was before modern era fixed rake formations of fitted freight wagons and bogie stock started to take over in the mid 1970s, increasingly travelling only from city to city or major depots so less marshalling required at intermediary stations. Dapol seem to have the best reputation for NEM accuracy. Small piece here on NEM https://www.railwaymagazinemodelling.co.uk/ask-a-daft-question-what-are-nem-362-coupling-pockets/

I have successfully replaced the TLC (tension lock couplings) on two rakes of MM mk2 coaches. The first rake was done with kadee and the second rake with Hornby R8220 close couplings between the coaches but a single kadee at each end of the rake for coupling to locos and better visual appearance. This works with fixed rake formations. Height is perfect when the kadee no 19 or 20 are glued to the underside of the NEM pocket rather than in the pocket. The Hornby R8220s (below) were fairly easy to fit once the TLCs were easily removed from the mk2's using the scalpel to trim the ends as in the first photo above. The last coach at each end of the rake had a kadee no 19 glued to the underside of the NEM pocket for coupling to locos. Spent a while doing running trials with the close couplers with reasonable results so far except for one coach which occasionally suffers a lock of the NEM coupling plate causing a derailment. I should be able to tweak that tomorrow in daylight when I can see watch is catching on the chassis. Comparison below of Hornby R8220 close couplers and the kadee's below. The orange roof rake have kadee's and the black roof have the Hornby R8220 close couplers. When stationary both types offer identical close coupling qualities, however once running a small gap will open up with the kadees, but nowhere near as big a gap as the standard TLCs that come with MM coaches. The Hornby R8220 close couplers keep the gap closed except on curves when the gap between the coaches opens up proportionally with the radius of the curve which avoids buffer lock and derailment. Stock coupled with either the kadee or R8220 can be lifted vertically out of a rake unlike TLCs (tension lock couplings), the kadees are the easiest to uncouple and lift out. PS: It is more than a little annoying that some manufacturers fail to consistently provide standard NEM 362 pockets at the correct vertical and horizontal position. Changing NEM couplings should be a matter of simple plug'n'play instead of requiring fettling and tweaking.

Phew, thanks @jhb171achill. Lucky for me one J15 and one green "C" class are already being prepared in the apothecaries bottle. There may be hope for a 'bogie' cure yet, but I am still concerned about 'yellow' fever.

Weathering Demos on today at Marks Models Rathcoole branch. Spotted this over on FB. Sounds like a great idea to get ones hands dirty without risking damage to models.

No worries, thats great. Thanks Fran. Looking forward to these.

I know, I know, boring uniform modern era mk2 sets invaded the layout a few weeks ago, now going to permit yellow contamination, where will it all end Ted? And it gets worse - bogie infestation - never seen a real Tara in my life, they mean nothing to me, some sort of a broach is all I remember from school, but they make super cute looking models so may be the only bogie freight wagons I ever permit. And at least they are nice and short. Honestly I have no autoballasters and never will, as Fr Sheamus Fitzpatrick might say about allied war memorabilia "that sort of thing wouldn't interest me at all at all"

Thanks. Ok I mistakenly thought decoders might just be needed for DCC switching rather than power. Ouch - two €25 decoders needed in addition then! Is there a CAD drawing showing where the decoders would be installed, and if there will be an 8 or 21 pin socket? Would a function only decoder such as the ESU LokPilot Fx V4 suit?

Cheers Fran. If I understood the announcement properly, am I right to assume the lights can also work without a DCC decoder on a DCC layout (i.e. just stay on all the time from track feed via switches)? Noel

Agree these look stunning. I don't like modern yellow stuff but will make an exception because these look absolutely exquisite and will go nicely with the ballasts. I hope to weather the yellow almost out of sight to a grimy brownish look. I presume the NEM pockets will be at the same height as the Ballasts which should make kadee hookup easy. Will only need an adjusted height on the rear of the lead plough to hook up to a loco via kadee. Request please lads re the interior lighting, 'warm white' please rather than 'cool white' (alias blue tint), and not too bright. Some of the MM loco cab lights seem as bright and blue as arc welding torches. Well done lads these look a stunning prospect.

That works Stephen. Fran's link is 'https' which was the cause of the problem. Above is 'http'

It works ok if you are logged into your IRM account. Just successfully ordered. But the link above won't work unless logged into IRMs shop site.

No products were found matching your selection.

Yes one has to be careful of optical illusions when checking colours, so with that photo one has to compare the colour on the sides of the loco bodies away from reflection and adjacent strong colours (e.g. red panel on front 084 and yellow on 118). 084 has more red in the mix, 118 has more yellow. Oh for 1960s tan.

PS: 084 and 218 above are painted in two quite different shades of orange/tan.

This was the fab photo from page 47 of 'Rails Though The West' that alerted me to these two axle timber wagons. A long rake of these might look better than fewer long 62ft wagons overhanging typical layout curves. They don't look too difficult to scratch build in plastic, and might fit on top of a Dapol RTR chassis body which costs €7ea inc wheels and couplings. Will investigate same over the next few months. They look fab running in railers youtube clip. Thanks to JB for photo permission - (C) Jonathan Beaumont and Barry Carse Interesting Youtube clip below of 2 axle timber wagons posted earlier above by @Railer.

One of the things I've learned is that the concentration of pigments in different colours can vary dramatically. When mixing colours always start with the lighter colour and progressively add very small amounts of the darker colour until it looks right by eye, not by volume of mix. This is particularly true of Vallejo paints, Tamiya less so. As you say the 'beholder' and lighting conditions can also be a big factor. I've started using sheets of plasticard primed with the same colour primer I intend to use on models so when a test sample of a paint mix is applied over the primer one will see how it really looks (when dry). Hair dryer can be used on such test samples to accelerate drying.

Oh no - surely it's not going to become a greenway?

Thank you again @jhb171achill for this fabulous encyclopaedia on stock during an era when real trains ran in Ireland. Re-read it last night, its is pure archive gold. Travelling recently on a plastic yo-yo through stations that no longer even have loops nor points reminded me how boring trains now are to look at, to travel on, to look out of the window from, boring stations devoid of activity, no freight, no shunting, no runarounds, no variety, just luas'y look-a-likes. I found re-reading 'Rails Through The West' a most pleasant antidote and tonic for nostalgia, and of course this hobby allows us all to relive whatever era we like old or new. I was chatting to a lady on board who also remembered regularly getting the Galway train years ago from Amiens street, and being told by the conductor to sit in the front coaches of the train because it would be splitting at Mullingar with the rear coaches going on to sligo. Galway station's once vast goods yard now only has two sidings for stabling yo-yos. Pages 46 and 47 of RTTW were pleasant reminders of what once was and what sort of scenes could still be modelled. Your post at the head of this thread may even be worthy of a possible sticky. PS: Did you receive my PM yesterday?