Noel

Thanks IT. I agree its not worth the work. With hindsight I should have followed your advice here DCC sound speaker comparison and just taken the back off the speaker box so it could drop in like yours. I will use the supplied speaker cradle in future and just remove the unnecessary plastic strip under the metal roof grill in future. BTW I just did the ESU CV54=0 + F1 motor calibration and it now drives better. Correct, yes thanks, I ordered the 141 chip, but decided to drop it into 190 instead of another 141 I have which is pending renumbering to 142. Hi Dave, no I didn't bother. I think the factor that has improved the speaker performance more than anything is removing the little sheet of plastic that is screwed in under the 141/181 roof grill, rather than the speaker type. It lets the sound out of the body. One really quirky little feature of the sound project is what happens when you change direction on your DCC cab. Believe it or not, it actually plays the sound of the driver opening the door of the cab, with foot steps as he walks along the walk way, opens and closes the door of the other cab. Interesting the 1st time but a real PITA because you can't drive until this little walkabout sequence has completed, so shunting is awkward. So I switched it off by setting F23/F24 to on (i.e. so when you change direction, you can drive immediately without delay). I love the sound of the EMD with this project and the long and distant horns F3 and F8. The distant horn simulates a doppler effect which is very impressive. However the short horn F2 sounds like it has a potato blocking it! The flange squeal is a bit loud but when I get a chance I will set its own individual volume lower. PS: Personally I find default volume on the LokSound chip set way too high and I usually reduce it by half. Your welcome Hope its of use EDIT: Video clip added with demo of 'Legomanbiffo' DCC sound on 181 class (same clip as on Kingsbridge thread)

Hi Richard, it is available for most of ESU's USA locos right now, but I don't know if or when MM might supply 'Full Throttle' versions of their existing LokSound chips for 071, 201. I see DC-Kits have announced 'DRIVELOCK' which I presume is their name for 'Full Throttle' on ESU LokSound diesel chips, but I don't know when they plan to re-release 141/181 chips with this software upgrade feature added. I've emailed Charlie Petty to ask. Noel

Video clip of DC-Kits (Legomanbiffo) LokSound v4 DCC sound chip with enhanced bass reflex speaker in Murphy Model 190 - 181 class. The clip was rather rushed, if I get some time next week I'll try and record some shunting operations and starting off with a heavy train. As I said in 1st post I'm not convinced the good sound quality is due to the bass reflex speaker and even if it is slightly better I wont be bothering to cut any more MMs to fit them. http://www.dckits-devideos.co.uk/shop/dcc_digital_loco_sounds/irish_diesel_loco_sounds/class_181_gm_bo_bo_dc_kits_.php http://www.dckits-devideos.co.uk/shop/dcc_digital_loco_sounds/irish_diesel_loco_sounds/class_141_gm_bo_bo_dc_kits_.php [video=youtube;QSAU1iYOg-w] We are spoiled for choice with sound on baby GMs, two LokSound options and one Zimo, and shortly a third LokSound option when 'Full Throttle' becomes available to match or possibly even exceed Zimo's superb 'Real Drive'. Happy Days for sound enthusiasts. I'll post this video clip to the layout thread in a few days.

Ok so far I have fitted DCC sound to a few Murphy Model 141/181s by installing a basic speaker in the speaker cradle provided inside the MM loco body. Really quick and easy to do all that was required was to lift off the loco body, solder the two speaker wires to the locos circuit board PCB at SP+ and SP-, plug a 21 pin sound decoder in (LokSound or Zimo), put the body back on and go. About 10-15 mins work and no cutting. However I decided to try a DC Kits supplied LokSound decoder with baby GM recording but with an enhanced bass reflex speaker. As the speaker is in an enclosed rectangular box it would not fit in the speaker cradle of an MM 141/181 nor even inside the Loco body with out some cutting and fettling to get it to fit in. It took me about 90 minutes as I was being careful to measure and weigh up options. A lot of work compared to dropping a basic speaker in the MM cradle. http://www.dckits-devideos.co.uk/shop/dcc_digital_loco_sounds/irish_diesel_loco_sounds/class_141_gm_bo_bo_dc_kits_.php Take loco body off (leave walkway side rails in place) Remove the supplied plastic speaker cradle - 2 screws Cut the two metal lugs off the metal chassis top that received the cradle screws (disc cutter) Cut away a raised section of the metal chassis just in front of the PCB (disc cutter) Cut away a small section off the underside end of the bass reflex speaker box (doesn't effect sound quality). The alternative to this is to cut a few millimetres off the end of the circuit board, but I decided not to bodge the loco anymore than I had to. (saw + knife) Remove the beige plastic support under the loco body roof grill - 2 screws (this obstructs the speaker box) Cut and file away the plastic lug on the inside of the loco body roof that received the rear most screw from above Plug the decoder in (which is prewired to the speaker) and place speaker box over the area where the cradle used to be with the cut away bit overlapping the circuit board Put the body carefully back on and pop the walkway rail ends back into both cab sides. Ok, got it done and it sounds great, but to be honest I won't bother again with all the hassle to fit a bass reflex speaker. In future I will instead just remove the beige plastic support from under the roof top grill which will let a lot more sound out of a standard cradled speaker. I didn't like bodging these lovely locos. I will post more on the sound quality and DCC operation later perhaps with a video clip. In summary, it sounds better than the Zimo with standard speaker, but doesn't drive as well (i.e. sound not mirroring throttle inputs quite as well). Ah well can't have everything. Overall though it is very good and the best sounding baby GM engine I've heard so far. PS: I would love to hear this recording in the future with the new LokSound 'Full Throttle' decoders because I suspect the drive and notching would sound and behave more realistic. PS2: I really liked the F3 long horn and F8 distant horn sounds, but the F2 short horn sounds awfully weak.

Finbar's photo review of 2016 had some great shots of BR/GWR/Virgin Intercity 125 trains. It struck me that BR and its successors have so far successfully operated these intercity mk3 coach sets and power units for 41 years, and plan to operate them until 2020 which will be about 45 years in service. By contrast our younger CIE/IE/IR mk3 coaches were only in service for 25 years before being scrapped. Our 071 class was only in passenger service for about 20 years before being replaced by the 201 class, but at least the 071s are still in freight service so thats 40 years. But many of the 201s left passenger service after only 15 years, with the Cork line retaining them for 21 years so far (excluding the enterprise). In fairness there must be a significant cost and logistical difference between operating single loco hauled passenger rakes and twin power unit push-pull sets like the BR 125s, hence CIE/IR/IE still had the costs of extra track work, coupling, time and staff, necessary for train runarounds and shunting at termini which the 22k did away with. I just can't help wondering if the mk3/201 combinations could have operated for another 15-20 years before being replaced had they all been push pull, or even the locos replaced with twin power units one at each end of each rake (i.e. like 125 sets). I know this topic has come up 'ad nauseum' in various guises in the past and not wishing to trigger any strong feelings on the matter, but curious how this came about. I assume there must have been a very strong cost saving case to take the plunge and retire these fleets early. Was this the case or were there other complex factors? A lot of capital appears to have been diverted to fleet replacement rather than the network, and there must have been a good case for this. I hope IR retain the Mk4 push-pull sets on the Cork main line. They have only been in service for 10 years. It was good to see the Enterprise DD sets get a rejuvenating overhaul last year.

Thanks for posting guys. Two absolutely stunning sets of rail photography. Finbar I feel very nostalgic looking at the BR 125 sets - 40 years and still going strong. That's maximising asset earnings. I travelled frequently on them in the 80s and 90s. Never had a model 125 mind you.

Love the dynamic traffic scenes and stock on this great layout.

Super pic. I almost thought the pair of G 600 class'es was like a two engined cab version.

Thanks John. Its a very long slow process. Safety measures now in place with barriers as per your helpful advice. The track work is Peco code 100, but I hope to lay code 75 on the lower branch line level. Barriers in place Black'n'tan service has been resumed Side profile view rather than modeller overhead

Yes thats what the 'Auto-Sw' does automatically. http://www.ncedcc.com/online-store/!/Auto-Sw-automatic-program-track-for-Power-Cab/p/38322162 PS: Some folk want the functionality of a test track but not physically separate from the layout, so they optionally isolate a 1 ft track section of layout (i.e. using plastic fishplates) from the rest of the layout but can be toggle switched using a DPDT switch between the test output of the 'Auto-SW' or the 'main track' output of the Power Cab (i.e. connected to the layout). This allows that 1ft section of track to normally be part of the layout, but if the DPDT switch is thrown it is separated from the layout and only functions as a test track.

Hi Northman We have an NCE Pro Cab so don't need 'Auto-Sw' as our controller already has two separate track outputs, one for layout and one for programming track. The NCE Power Cab (almost identical system) only has one track output. However this one output can be switched from 'layout track' mode to 'program track' mode. The catch is you must remove all locos from the layout except the one you want to program (i.e. because the entire layout becomes the programming track). You could use the Auto-SW switch, or even wire up your own DPDT switch to toggle your single controller output from the layout to a short piece of test track, and then switch the NCE from 'main' mode to 'test/program mode'. Hope this makes sense. Personally I prefer having a short 1ft piece of test track thats on the workbench. Noel PS: Btw, NCE also allow you to 'program on the main' (i.e. change CVs of locos on the layout, but it is write only, you can only query CV settings on the test track). So much for 'railcom' bidirectional programming dream. See here https://ncedcc.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201656579-Auto-SW-Auto-Switch-for-Powercab PS2: The thing to remember is the that the 'program/test track' would program ALL locos on it, hence its usually a short piece of track and never has more than one loco on it.

Great find. Thanks for posting that fabulous video clip. Pure nostalgia. It is amazing the line was in such good condition and even passable six years after it closed. What is the status of the track bed now?

3 words: Prolific and Stunning

Thank you for all the superb photos last year

They look seriously good.

Few more pics of Christmas present rake of Bachmann oil wagons. Apologies for poor photo quality, very narrow focus DOF due low light, ISO 6400 hand held Shell, BP and Esso - The Esso's are lightly factory weathered. Late evening - Busy traffic pattern at the junction Old signal box is a Triang Rovex, H vans are 1970s Lima, B&T coach is a 70s hand painted old BR non corridor coach Close up of gentle factory weathering - apologies blurry photo.

Hi Fran. Yes thanks, Bachmann UK stock. I've always liked the look of them. Now if I got a few more of them repainted in 'Irish Shell' livery I'd have the big three all in one imaginary rake. Cheers. Noel

Be it Peco code 75, 100 or 83, the 'log in the eye' of 00 gauge track is that it is over 13 scale inches too narrow for Irish broad gauge track and 7 inches too narrow even for UK standard gauge track. The incorrect width between the rails seems much more visually obvious than the track height differences, but at least code 75 visually negates the gauge error. Few have the time, or skills experience to build expensive custom track for 21mm gauge layouts, but when you see a 21mm gauge Irish layout it looks so amazing. Images below from Templot - Adavoyle Junction 21mm scale guage Peco 00 Setrack and code 100 streamline are intermixable with Hornby. If you want to mix code 75 you will need short track adaptors to connect the two parts of a layout. http://www.peco-uk.com/product.asp?strParents=&CAT_ID=3327&P_ID=18129 PS: Happy Birthday Garfieldsghost

Great pics as ever. One of the advantages of BRs 125 Intercity fleet was a power unit at each end so at least they could limp home under their own power at reduced speed if one power unit failed. Does anybody know if a 201/Mk4 set fails but a second 'rescue' loco is coupled up to the failed loco, can it still be driven in the opposite direction from the DVT?

New addition Esso/BP oil wagons - Christmas present from my soul mate. The Esso ones are gently factory weathered

As a child I regularly travelled on the Dublin-Galway train from Amiens Street which used the Mullingar route to Athlone and the old station on the west of the Shannon. Its now a cycleway. Also used to get the train to and from Moate.

There was a famous case over 25 years ago when a very large crane in transit just grazed the underside of a large pedestrian over-bridge on a dual carriageway. Result road closed for weeks while bridge removed, eventually rebuilt. It went legal, but in the end after a few years the crane operators insurers were just about to cough up, when a junior researcher discovered the local authority was in fact at fault for the reduced bridge clearance due to a number of road resurfacing projects over the years when they had not removed some of the previous surfaces, therefore raising the level of the dual carriageway. The crane operator had originally correctly researched the clearance and would not have hit the bridge had the road been where it was supposed to be! If the junior researcher working for the cranes insurers had not discovered the mistake they would have paid millions. Instead the local authority rightly had to pay for the damage to the crane and the loss of hire revenue.

Just noticed most of the sleepers in that lovely photo are standing exposed on top of the track bed rather than embedded in ballast.

Hi Tony. I think it certainly would in N gauge. Noel

Finally reverse engineered the track plan (see below). Using RailModeller Pro on MacBook. Quite impressed with the software once I figured out a few tricks and techniques. All the track has been laid except for the lower of the 3 levels (i.e. green). It will be Peco code 75 with electrofrog because of the 0-6-0 steam locos that are likely to run on it as well as 60s MM.