Junctionmad

Given how out of scale PECO 100 is, and the fact any produced in recent history ( and most certainly anything with wheels to RP25/110) will run well on PECO 75. Why build using an seriously out of scale product. I can fully undertand if you have 40 year old stock etc , thats a different story same story re electrocfrog versus insulfrog, etc. ( though the distinction is less stark here)

If you read railway technical history, It was clear that as much mis-placed emotion as technicalities convinced some in the railway world that steam locomotives would last much longer then they did. It was clear from post war America , where much railway technology had come, that the diesel was trouncing the steam loco. The main issues were its capital cost and initial technical complexity. While its certainly was a " nice what might have been " , its s miracle stream traction lasted as long as it did . as for taking 800s out before their time, well CIE has a superb history of that .!!!

Noel, of this parish, was recently explaining to me, that there was a proposed branch line from bray to enniskerry, which never got built . But various embankments and stone work were laid that can be seen along the current road from the motorway to enniskerry Anyone know more .

It's not Birmingham new street. ( which is another amazing layout ) it's has diesel era track work , I can't remember where it came from , ( may have been templot club forum ) I merely post it to illustrate , that there is a considerable range of what people view as " best". Track Personally for me, I'm in between, I like track that matches the prototype better then peco , but equally thAt can be implemented in a normal lifetime , that's why I experimenting with c&l and hand built 00-SF. ( also it's cheaper then others methods ), but then I , personally, have no desire to " get trains running quickly " ( and right now I can't anyway ) The concept of " best" track is similar to asking what's the " best " car. You really have to proscribe the question with the key requirements you feel are important , then out of that falls the answer of " what's best for you " Ps: I'm surprised for new build anyone is still considering PECO 100 .

Well I was part of a conversation with PM, at the Raheny exhibition, where he explicitly pointed out his age and asked us to draw the inevitable conclusion. I think it's obvious we will not see any new models under his leadership of MM and that's perfectly understandable. Personally I think like many the decision to do a 201 class over 121 was an error of judgement , but that's just me.

Code 75 is about right for typicall main line bull head rail, with code 82 -85 being right for the heavier sectioned flat-bottomed track. Historically irish non important sidings were laid with around equivalent code 55 light weight flat bottomed rail

It's depends on what your standards are https://www.dropbox.com/s/naq53we4ke05kiq/2015-01-31%2010.41.17.jpg?dl=0 That is my idea of the " best " model railway track Tillig is an alternative to peco , more expensive

With the greatest respect. While it might be possible for PM to re - release existing models assuming the mould tools are in good order , I cannot see any new releases forthcoming given his age. I'm sure he has felt he has done enough at this stage. Given the advances in 3D printing etc. I cannot see the issue in the future with specialist models like irish railways. We can have great kits and small volume runs of suitable locos etc. it's not really practical to expect the same group of people , ie the small customer base , to endlessly support large volume irish RTR.

Just going back to the OPs question " best track " You have to answer that question first. , what does " best" mean for you Quickest to lay , lowest cost , most realistic looking, best running , best for finescale wheels etc , if your goal is unpack boxes and lay track , you are limited to Tillig or PECO. if you decide on peco , I would suggest peco 75 woth electrofrogs. I can't see any point in peco 100 as all stock built in the last 30 years has flanges that will run on code 75. Code 75 is closer to real life sizes. The flange way dimensions of peco 75 and 100 are the same too Personally peco looks incredibly wrong for irish prototypes where 00 is a massive compromise more so then Uk modellers. If you are modelling bullhead track then peco looks really wrong as there is no light between the track and the ballast. Personally , for me " best" , assuming you are staying 00 gauge , is C&L bullhead flexi and hand built points to match the sweep of the prototype , with 1mm flange ways to handle both finescale kit wheels and RTR wheels, ie for example Murphy models 141 are rp25/110 woth a total thread width of 2.79 mm and a flange depth of 0.8mm ( 30 thou ). Interesting the MM 201 has deeper flanges For comparison the proto type thread is around 1.85 mm width. In my opinion peco is " ok " as long as you don't intend to use wheels with more prototypical dimension then RP 25/110 , otherwise the wheel falls into the space infront of the " V" and you get a wheel bump Again it's all down to what you view as " best "

What someone must have tried this ? No

The Wexford line is all CWR too. But has very severe speed restrictions in places. It's a pity about the 22k seating. I'd forgive it's a bus on rails of at least the seats were decent. I mean this is meant to be intercity quality stuff, yet the seats are padded like waiting room seats, with near vertical backs etc. all designed for sardine style pack em in standards I was looking at some old photos , if according to IE more people then ever are using rail , and we regularly had 8-9 coaches on trains from Dublin, how the hell do they transport more people in 3 car or 6 car OCR sets. Something doesn't add up It's funny when people think a " benefit ' is the seats line up with the with the windows, a feature of proper coaching stock for decades The return journey was on a 29 k commuter. I can see why the 2013 strategic rail review wanted them removed from the rosslare service , god they are truely awful, reminiscent of the last days of the old pre dart Dublin suburban service ( at least they were PR) I remember as a lad of 14 getting onto my first mk2 train in Waterford. Wow. The loudest thing was the aircom pump cutting in

Anyways. I'm returning to my pickup truck.

Personally for comfort. I preferred the park royals. After that the cravens then the mk2 and 3 stock I mean mk2 and mk3 over CWR where virtually silent. Funny in rail travel we seem to go backwards in comfort , seats are too narrow, badly padded, seat pitch is tighter, and even the tables are smaller. Same thing recently in Italy , ICE trains has similar packed seating , switched to stopping trains instead, got a compartment coach , three armchairs across the compartment , bliss I've taken to the bed from the shock of modern day IE. Average speed to gorey 30 mph. , peak speed 65 , for 4 mins , typical speed 45. Youse can keep your DMUs. Thanks they'll never grace any layout of mine

Since I hate DMUs I haven't really travelled on IE since 2005 , travelled up from Gorey today. Wow, who'd bother travelling by train these days unless u where forced to. 2 hour journey , most at slow speeds. 22k is just passable runied by engine noise and awful awful seats. Return journey by clapped out 29k , no loos , no facilities nothing. And this is 15 mins longer journey Awful awful system. Well my next journey will on average be in 2020 so maybe IE will be gone by then Give me a craven , its nice wide bench seat , nice stream heating , and a proper loco at the front any day Bah humbug

what I was thinking is why C - AWS. C( AWS) is essentially a warning system, Train Protection seeks to control SPADS , whereas in reality C(AWS) is really a yellow light ( caution) acknowledge system. its why southern division of BR resisted it for so long as , it had the running on yellows issues. My understanding re CAWS, is that IE, does only intervention braking on downgrades to caution ( or various aspects of caution). There is no train protection on Red signals ( this is the remit of TP systems as speed of approach must be controlled to have a system that can handle intervention stop on red). ( in the UK AWS applies to distance and yellow aspects only in effect as it cannot handle SPADs) What I was asking is why IR/IE figured it needed continuous AWS, involving installing coded track circuits , when much larger enterprises like rail track and network rail, saw that intermittent train protection systems were all that was necessary. Even the UK ATP system is non continuous . Why have CAWS and line side signals together ( in the US it was seen as a way of replacing signalling infrastructure ) IN fact in the US. where CAWS originated ,the railroad companies have not implemented it in any generic way. ( they dont like intervention braking anyway ) I just cant see any the much cheaper AWS wasn't used and it would have retained compatibility with NIR. Seems a rather perverse, " go it alone " decision

given that CAWS isn't a train protection system, what was the thinking in IE behind its introduction. In theory it could replace line side signals , but these are also there anyway. In the UK , at no stage was it felt necessary to repeat signals in the cab ,, alone , i.e. without intervention braking, yet UK railways are running faster trains How extensive is CAWS in the republic ?

interesting, cant see how they would do much, check rails in the normal sense are not used to contain derailments I presume this is what you mean http://www.irishrail.ie/media/may_timetable_24042015.pdf?v=8rhurqe

It was mentioned to me recently , what was the extra rail fixed down in various places on IE network near the middle of the track. It later too far apart to be a check rail Any ideas ?

Did he not SPAD the station starter on his arrival into LJ. Or are CIE a little flexible on those things. Bizarre how long LJ held out CTC ?!!

just saw this on boards.ie https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tosTH63BVgY from the 90s, when we had real trains amazing how rough the ride was at times on normal rail the end bit of the video is different, looks like the neuston pilot in action

I am thinking of using a foam core baseboard construction, using two skins of 3-5mm ply epoxy bonded to a 25-50mm structural foam. The best type is probably closed cell PVC foam at about 70 euros per 6x4 , or alternatively high density expanded polystyrene, ( often blue or pink ) which is sold for insulation purposes. The polystyrene isn't closed cell. There will be a balancer skin of 3-5mm ply on the bottom bonded by epoxy. and the sides will be covered to mitigate moisture ingress. The idea is to build removal lightweight but strong baseboard, that can sit unsupported on trestle legs. any comments , anyone any experiences

Thanks, Im currently now building all this in Templot, which is quite an undertaking. But allows me to accurately confirm the baseboard sizes, Some point work is actually smaller then calculated by Traxx too.

For completeness I have added the ballinrobe branch. In fact given it's simplicity and smaller size I may even begin there I have photo records of the station , goods shed, coaling stage , signal box and engine shed. I'll have to interpret dimensions. From photos. The ballinrobe branch is at a lower level then claremorris

mind you some of those liner trains were very short, most must have been loss making to haul.

Amazingly he crossed on the chain ferry , the black water river to get to wayerford castle -doh !!!