Noel

Looks really nice. GWR is my favourite of the big four. Where did you get the lovely back scenes?

I like both also. My only gripe is the shape of the face end of the DD DVT looks like it was made by a child out of cardboard, ugly is insufficient to describe the duplo-brick look, but otherwise the DDs and Mk4s are fine looking coaches. I like the new enterprise livery but the forward end looks a little plain and could do with some small colour element added to the overall grey. IMHO its the front end that should look the most striking and eye catching from a marketing perspective as it enters a station passing folk looking on. The 22000s aren't bad lookers either despite my total lack of interest in model ICRs and DMUs, but as a passenger they look well on the outside.

There we go

Interesting. Would the reason for the pre-heat days in advance be because the coaches might have been in storage and more to do with drying any damp out of the interiors rather than just heat? I can't imagine the coaches needing more than a few hours just to warm up the inside air temperature. Well I remember flying on 747-100 a few times many moons ago, with a dead 5th engine bolted onto a special wing mount inboard of the no 2 for transport purposes. I guess it made sense to haul coaches on the back of scheduled services in order to reposition them.

Yes that was rather obvious

No, they didn't run like that in the IR/IE era. The nose of the 121 was always facing the other loco in the consist. They stayed coupled as pairs and ran around trains in pairs.

That's why I plan to buy three. One pair nose2nose and one to consist with a 141/181. There were only 15 x 121s, but 49 baby GMs so I'd eventually like to keep the ratio looking similarly proportionate on the layout. (3 x 121s : 10 x babies). But I might break that rule to have a single delivery grey 121 in a display case.

This doesn't seem close To this profile The front of the DVT looks like a cardboard box a child brought home as a prop from a school play

That was a fast response. But boy those enterprise DVTs make ugly ducklings look pretty - a real 1970s look about it shape wise. Some NIR stock is not famed for its aesthetic beauty. The IE Mk4 DVTs are like graceful swans by comparison. (pic from BBC web site)

There's a 121 shades of orange standing on the wall . . . Back on thread, any idea if the NEM sockets on the new 121s might be on the body or the bogies?

Interesting photo of a mk2 with half tippex coupled to a mk3. The different shades of orange on the coaches is very clear in that pic.

Those things look like something from 1930s Peter Cushing horror movie. The sort of trains Frankenstein travelled on, or freight deliverys to the Dalek factory. Yes that's what I thought. Strange though at that time running nose first was such an issue given most of the drivers would have been used to the restricted visibility of steam locos. But I can see though that any new drivers trained in A or C class, or Sulzers would have felt very uncomfortable driving the 121s nose first. Same thing happened on British rail with the class 20s and they were run in nose to nose pairs also.

Thought some of the steam trains were double headed for the steep incline out of Cork, and even tripled for the incline on heavy trains. Wasn't there was a siding or loop north of Cork past the incline for the additional locos to hold once uncoupled while their train passed on to Dublin.

CIE/Irish Rail No 461 Steam Loco official relaunch by President Mary Robinson Pearse Street 1991 Interesting old clip with brass bands, etc

Looking forward to these next year from MM 2 of these (no hand rail along sides) And one of these for static display

Spotted this "Irish Rail Ballast Hopper Train, 10 wagons & 2 plough vans" on eBay for €350. http://www.ebay.ie/itm/Irish-Rail-Ballast-Hopper-Train-10-wagons-2-plough-vans-Murphy-Models-etc-/262233741941?hash=item3d0e595a75:g:hioAAOSwwPhWkmUt

Shhh! That is just my last hurrah - from now on its RTR all the way with four MM 121s next winter.

Hi JM. Fair enough. Each on to their own. Personally I don't have the time to build anymore nor the inclination when RTR is far better than anything I could build. But that's just me, I've got to the stage in life where I just want to operate really nice looking choo-choos in an authentic manner. My building will be limited to layout elements. I buy my veggies in Tesco's too rather than grow them in the back garden!

Wow that's insanely clever

In the old days we used to scratch build RC model aircraft from plans, or basic kits using balsa, dope and tissue. Times have moved on and technology has changed, now modern high quality composite materials and plastics are used, kits are now mostly semi finished assembly jobs, ARFT, or more commonly RTF (ready to fly out of the box) like RTR railway models. Not as many folk are prepared build things anymore for a whole range of reasons. I guess materials such as brass and white metal are the equivalent of the balsa and tissue materials that dominated model aircraft construction decades ago. There is no right or wrong just what one is used to. But today one senses most consumers want high quality RTR straight out of the box, hence the MM 121 should sell well and prove very popular right across the entire modelling spectrum.

I suppose it depends on ones definition of and the composition of a kit. If it is a 100% complete kit with absolutely all parts, paints and decals supplied, then the example you describe Brian I would find attractive because it basically would only require assembly and painting, using screws, snap fittings, and small amount of glue, but no fabrication, filing, sanding, drilling, soldering nor cutting. A relatively easy way to build using injection moulded plastic parts. The only thing that could go wrong is the painting.

Not for me because it would still leave the chassis problem, prefer RTR, and just personally speaking not keen on brass. Prefer the detail of high quality injection moulded plastic. The 121 like the other MMs will deliver both fine scale authenticity packaged with a truly top class chassis that runs superbly and prototypically. Wonder if the new MM 121 will have the NEM pocket attached to the body or the bogie? It might spoil the look of the distinctive 121 cab end if there is a big gap in the front valance to accommodate a bogie mounted coupling, but I guess it could be supplied with an optional valance filler like the existing GM models.

I've been flying computer flight sims since Sub-Logic on Apple II in 1980, through Atari, many others, ATC, and finally all the versions of Microsoft Flight sim right up to FS2004. I lost interest for a few years and put my FS gear away (i.e. control yokes, rudder pedals, quad throttle, hud cap, switch panels, etc). In last year or so decided to get going again assuming I'd be running the latest Microsoft version via VmWare on my mac as I don't suffer PCs anymore - but discovered Microsoft quit the FS business years ago!!! Bit of googling and various FS forum reads later, discovered X-Plane which runs on Mac and PC seems to be 'de rigour' and in favour, so bought a native Mac version and have to say even at this very early stage quite impressed with the flight dynamics of the thing. Great for IFR with excellent weather patterns. http://www.x-plane.com/desktop/home

Apologies RR, sure understand.

Sure. Delighted the 121s in the pipeline and looking forward to same. Happy to wait for other events to unfold or not in 3 or 4 years. In the mean time I am in the middle of changing chassis for two MVs. Having re-read the press release, a bit confused, is the first batch of MM 121s likely to have the IR logo (rails) or IE logo (3 pin plug)?