Noel

Thanks for taking the time to make that clip and post it. Very interesting. I noticed the horn at the beginning of the 142 segment sounded different to the horn at the end of the 165 segment. If you got a chance sometime to post a clip with the braking sound on stopping and the flange squeal. If you are programming the LokSound yourself, are you able to extract the other channels from the MM recordings on ESUs web site (e.g. whistle, station announcement, brakes, etc).

GPS is an area I have some background since the late 90s. Consumer grade GPS sensors are not infallible and are prone to positional errors. There have been huge improvements in the past 8 years with things such as smoothing algorithms that filter out errors, and especially in the area of augmented signals, but consumer grade GPS averages 3-6m accuracy only 95% of the time, and are prone to local interference. See the reports from Yachtsmen in various parts of the world where there have been temporary disruption of signals from local sources of interference. It is rather inexpensive to locally jam a GPS signal. Newer top end quadcopters have some decent algorithms that more heavily weigh the feedback from gyros to augment the decisions based on GPS. A QC has a lot of mechanical moving parts and electronics on something that is not feather light. You only need 1% failure if flying over something more than vegetation to risk damage to 3rd party property or persons.

Agree you would never get permission nor insurance cover. However the video clips shown here of Ballyglunin taken in a remote unpopulated scene had minimal risks because it wasn't flying over people nor active roads. In such 'minimal risk' circumstances it may be more practical to seek forgiveness afterwards than seek permission beforehand!

What an insane price for such a basic toy model. There must be one born every minute. There is collecting, and then there is collecting rubbish for future landfill.

Whatever about airnav SI's and toy drones, the video clip was excellent

Thanks. I just had never seen trap/catch points run over on a main line like that before. They must be fairly heavily engineered to have an entire liner train spring them back and forth as each bogie passes over.

Having watched your clip, I found this on youTube Look at about 4m15s into the video the 201 runs over opposed check points that are open and forces them closed! Is this normal a normal op? [video=youtube;-6m-L-X7vDc] Also at 6mins into clip she runs back through a red signal with a small semaphore square not set at danger!!! Is the semaphore shape a shunting signal that overrides the main light?

Sounds like 'Welcome to Monty Python's Railway'

Superb, really enjoyed those photos. Great progress.

I'd assume spare parts. As far as I know Bachmann have not produced split frame chassis for many years, so it's not really surprising.

That's a great idea.

So have I, but the problem is getting the chassis back into perfect alignment once split. The DCC bit is easy, it is the isolation of the motor from the chassis requiring the split that has caused me problems. Some have worked out ok, but others have never run as smoothly or freely afterwards and I've found myself having to resplit and realign the chassis multiple times until it mechanically ran as smoothly and freely as it had on DC before the conversion. One of my early attempts http://irishrailwaymodeller.com/showthread.php/3573-Noel-s-DCC-Conversion-Bench/page3

Really well priced so not surprised. IMHO, those baby GMs are simply the best quality 00 gauge model locos I've ever operated. A credit to the MM and Bachmann team.

Agree. For me DCC is being able to operate locos independently on the same section of track without the need for block switching and wiring. It's just easier to control a loco from a hand held cab rather than a bank of switches and a controller. Sound and lights are a nice bonus, but I don't ever see myself running accessories or points using DCC. In that case the convenience and tactile feel of lever arm switches is more useable than typing silly accessory and point numbers into a cab unit. DCC's momentum capability is nice also, but I have that on my DC inertia controllers anyway (i.e. brake simulation). Having only moved to DCC last august, I'm glad I made the move despite the cost of decoders and the time to retro fit them into old stock. Some were easy to do, but a few were really awkward. The plug in 21pin chips on MM and Bachmann locos couldn't be easier. Split frame Bachmann steam locos are really a no-no for DCC, IMHO.

Reluctantly I decided not to bother converting our Lima locos to DCC because the ones I have are poor runners at low speeds and not smooth over point work unless running at moderate speeds. I've yet to see a Lima model that is a smooth low speed runner. In fairness I don't know if the Lima 201s had better motors but from the threads on here they seem to have the same crude rough running pancake motors that ours had.

201s are not designed to be used that way.

There was a myth that a pair of 201s in a consist hauling a special was a little over zealous on acceleratiion causing damage to couplings on some coaches. 6400 hp would need to be eased in gradually on a heavy train. Fiction or True?

Earlier today while looking for one of my old Lima CIE Mk1 coaches for the other thread on Lima Murphy Models, I found the this old Triang Hornby LMS coach that trigged the memory of me trying to improve the corridor connectors back in 1975 by bodging on flexible corridor extensions. Most models of BR Mk1 back then had very short corridors and large gaps, so I remember reading a "Tip" in 1974 railway modeller mag, showing how to add extensions using plasticard and black tissue paper. As a teen I bodged the mod to a few maroon LMS coaches. As well as adding the flexible corridor connections I liked to be able to see through the corridor inside the coach, so cut out the ends as well. Looks a bit bockety now and the frame has warped over the past 40 years, but it stayed in tact. This really was a toy of yesteryear - crude models but back then they were the bees knees . . .

HO & OO use the same track, but they are different scales. OO models are slightly larger, however european trans have a larger loading gauge than british outline, so an HO gauge Deutsch Bahn coach is almost the same height and width as an 00 Gauge british outline coach. 16.5mm track is actually the wrong scale for 00 gauge (i.e. too narrow), but pretty close to scale for HO models.

Hi Dave. Not sure about the green ones, but this Lima Black&Tan CIE model from the 70s was 00 gauge (i.e. BR Mk1s). This model must be nearly 40yo. It's side by side with a Triang Hornby LMS Mk1 which is even older. Did PM have any part in Lima producing these. It was about the same time as the Vans were produced and the class 33s masquerading as CIE MV A classes.

Superb looking loco. So atmospheric.

Indeed, but what has this got to do with route clearance for the 201s? Well it was your good self who mentioned that the bridge replacement effected the 201 route restriction, and I just mentioned the co-incidental side effect impact it had on Shannon leisure boat traffic, because it is a bridge I knew well and passed under it more times than I travelled over it. Remembering the old bridge I can understand why it had a 201 weight restriction. That sligo line was in an appalling state until the track was upgraded some years ago and had fairly severe speed restrictions. On IR's plan to investigate engine replacement on 20yo or 40yo locos, if fuel efficiency is the reason, one has to wonder about the true economic sense as the payback in fuel savings is unlikely to recoup the capital costs unless they get 100% EU grant aid. If emissions are the reason, EU emissions regs only apply to purchasing new locos or new engines, so doubt they can be forced to stop using the old 071s and 201s, unless nanny Ireland wants to waste public money being good europeans without a binding legal requirement to do so. On the other hand if the engines in the 071 and/or 201s are so clapped out and excessively expensive to keep in service, replacing the motors would seem a sensible and less expensive option than buying new locos. Are the loco shops in Inchicore capable of machining parts needed for the old EMD engines including pistons, liners, shafts, rods, etc, or do they depend on buying spares from EMD? I assume the former but that's just a wild guess.

Excellent, I love it. Great scenes.

When that railway bridge was raised higher it was easier for boats on the Shannon to fit under without having to drop gear. It was a tight squeeze when water levels were high. There are a number of bord-na-mona light railway bridges over other parts of the Shannon. It kind of makes sense to re-engine 201s rather than 40yo 071s, but I was told apparently the some of the 071s have been practically totally rebuilt including chassis and body structure making some of them effectively almost new builds - myth or true, I know not.

Thanks Dave. Yes CLIP looks like it could be an interesting improvement over current 3D technology, which so far is rubbish IMHO for 00 gauge models. The poor finish texture and low resolution of current 3D printing is truly awful, and so slow to produce. Its early days yet though, a bit like ink jet printers in 1994, but look what they can do now.