Noel

Ping?

Wonderfully realistic scenes Noel. I can imagine the purr of the GM motors at idle and almost hear a distant angle grinder at work in the sheds behind. (other Noel)

Hi Patrick. Loco already has correct 121 bogie side frames (see photo above). But yes I could have re-used the 141 side frames slightly modified when they were replaced with MV resin ones for the C class, instead of the 3D FUD ones. Aside from only one brake cylinder there were a few other small differences between 141 and 121 bogies. I've another C class in the works using another MM 141 donor chassis so I will save the bogie side frames in case I do another Shapeways 121. Noel

Cheers EM. 121 turned out better then I had expected. The body is a WSF print (white strong flexible). Few bits of plasticard added including roof. The bogies were 3D FUD prints (frosted ultra detail). Having figured out one of these combinations I was all set to do two more, but think I'll wait instead for the MM 121s which are due later in the year. If there is any delay with the MMS I'm chomping at the bit to try a grey livery one. Really pleased with the smoothness of the latest iteration of the Athearn chassis. Noel

B121 on cine film duty. Shapeways body + Athearn chassis (click for video)

You packaging work was appreciated and mentioned some weeks ago.

Fabulous film clip. Thanks for posting. So what changes would one need to make to IRM Ballast train to pass it off as 'Dolomite' train?

Fabulous layout photo scenes as ever Patrick. Great idea. Goods traffic rather than solely PW ballast use. I plan to do the same with older style plough van (i.e. brown/bauxite colour). I don't do yellow - far too modern looking for my personal taste!

Very nice. Looks super John. Looking at that wonderful outdoor layout, the maintenance required to keep track clear on a garden railway seems more that worth the effort. Model train services back here in Ireland seem virtually suspended for the summer season especially with the heat wave here now. Weather too nice to be cooped up indoors, but not in your case.

I'd hazard a guess new MM 141/181s may become readily available on eBay at much lower prices as soon as the MM 121 hits retailers shelves this autumn.

Nice pics, especially the last one.

Very nice and stunnngly precise paint jobs. How do they run, are they DC or DCC?

Bantry Pier really looking well. It's hard to believe a large part of the US Atlantic naval fleet lay at anchor on Bantry Bay in Bearhaven sound for significant part of WW1. A visit to Bear Island is like a time warp, and Lonehort naval battery a must see. It's more craggy island than craggy island ever was.

What is gouache? Is it a specific colour, or a method, or a type of paint (i.e. acrylic or watercolour)?

Sure I understand that, but what about the commercial cost difference between point to point delivery (a single delivery leg) on a small geographical island, verses point to rail to point (i.e. three delivery legs)? BTW, personally I'd prefer to see more freight by rail than road, but wonder if road is more efficient and less expensive for businesses. Has electrification of mainline rail been considered and costed in recent decades?

Ok, but our freight trains are "diesel" powered, rather than electric, so I can't see much of a difference in CO2 footprint moving say 14 containers from a shipping port to 14 different end point destinations, especially when the geographic distances are relatively short. Road option is also probably faster delivery point to point.

With the new motorway network is it not less expensive for companies to transport containers directly by road point to point using HGVs?

Ah, thanks for that info. Nice to hear consumer feedback resulted in subsequent changes, but perhaps a pity the modification didn't also correct the height and reach. I had mistakenly assumed the whole idea of NEM pockets was so consumers could easily change coupling types without needing tools and without having to cut or glue anything. From reading RMweb it seems the NEM 362 issue has also been a problem for manufacturers of British outline stock.

Ah Right so. I thought I read somewhere the axle loading might be too high for main line use, and wheel spin could buckle some modern track. I presume none of the functioning turn tables could accommodate 800 anyway.

800 is too heavy, so you'll also have to win the Euro millions lottery to pay for the upgrading of the track work on the Belfast-Dublin route

Thanks Patrick. I had searched a few times using advanced search, but as word 'kadee' was not in the thread title I didn't find this. Thanks Eoin That great. We did indeed two years ago. I couldn't remember if it was here it was discussed before or over on RMweb. By chance I was just using the razor saw to do as you have recommended in that thread. With the 'play' in kadees I'm beginning to wonder if they are worth the hassle, and with so many suppliers incorrect heights. Thanks again. Noel Bizarre that the IE/IR livery have different size pockets to the CIE livery cravens. Photo from RMweb Kadee Resources page

Thanks Stephen, but do you mean plug a no 20 into the NEM pocket, or glue a kadee under the NEM pocket (on cravens)? If I plug no 20 into either craven NEM pocket sizes the couplings don't reach each other despite being the longest NEM kadees.

What a mess - MM Cravens need to be bodged to fit kadee couplings. The longest NEM kadee is no 20 which does not work with MM Cravens unless modified. While fitting Kadee couplings I discovered NEM 362 Pockets on some MM Craven are not NEM 362 standard length nor correctly positioned relative to buffers, but at least at the right height. (see pic below) . The pockets on the IE/IR twin stripe livery Cravens are too long and not therefore NEM362 spec, as are the tension lock couplings supplied with these coaches (i.e. shaft is longer). . But the CIE single stripe cravens have the correct length NEM362 pockets and supplied with tension lock couplings with appropriately shorter shafts. . To fit Kadee no 20s to the IE/IR coaches the excessively long NEM pocket must be drilled on each side to create a recess for the end of the coupling shaft to click into (i.e. to stop them pulling out). This recess must also be such that the kadee is about 1mm proud of the end of the NEM pocket face or it will not reach the coupling on the next coach. . To fit Kadee no 20s to the CIE single stripe cravens even though the no 20 fits the NEM pocket and snap fits, it is too far behind the buffers to couple up to next coach, so the pocket has to be drilled in the sides so the kadee no 20 is fitted about 1mm proud of the NEM pocket face. Bizarre that the same coaches with only slightly different paint schemes have different NEM couplings. Why bother supplying rolling stock with NEM pockets unless they are the correct NEM 362 spec, the correct length, the correct position and the correct height. MM Cravens have gone from a perfect 10 out of 10 in my book to a mere 9 out of 10 because of this major annoyance. How have others got around this inconsistent NEM 362 pocket problem? I know an option is to ignore the NEM pockets and glue or screw kadee gearboxe couplings like 146, or 148 direct to the coach body.

A great reference for the shades of green used in CIE flying snail era [video=youtube;L6YrqZ7HZ-0]

That's resourceful modelling