Garfield

Lovely work, Bren. When I saw the thread title my immediate thought was that you were working on one of these... Bugatti autorail PLM by kitchener.lord, on Flickr

Cheers, Noel. Just a few minor adjustments needed to the CAD before we sign off on it; the amended version should be arriving in the inbox very soon. After that we move onto tooling and we'll hopefully have a pre-production sample early in the new year.

Hi folks, A quick sales update for you... Half the planned run of 333 sets have been reserved so far and orders are continuing to come in.

That cover is a bit racey, Broithe...

An overhaul of the company's operations and logistical issues with its suppliers are cited as the primary cause... http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/08/hornby-losses-widen-supplier-problems-china-it-upgrade

We're not all as shifty as you!

Wow! Superb modelling right there!

The IOMR locomotive isn't a bad place to start as an almost identical locomotive operated on the Ballymena & Larne line (or was it the Ballycastle? I can't remember exactly...).

Ah here. Your hackneyed oul' "if you don't like what I have to say, don't read it" line is nothing more than a childish attempt to get away with saying whatever you want without being checked on it. That's not how it works in the real world, though, and if that grates with you then it's your problem alone. In the previous post you claimed to have inside knowledge of workings at Malahide Castle and referenced an earlier contribution to back this up. However, all it proved was that you were spoofing, so I called you on it. That's a world away from me getting my knickers in a twist, believe me. But you are right in saying it meant a lot to me to post about it... because I'm not going to let someone assume an authoritative voice when they have absolutely zero grounds for doing so. Again, if you don't like that, it's your problem. As for the last part of your post... a sure sign someone is losing an argument is when they go off-point altogether and attempt a few cheap shots. We're now way off course here. If you have any follow-up, do so by PM and leave the thread free for further discussion about the plans for the Fry Model Railway (which, by the way, you're still free to contribute to as long as you have something worthwhile to add).

Ah, that makes sense... getting stuff muddled in my head! Although it was operated by one of the 80 class sets on hire from late 1980s, after the last push-pull was withdrawn (to much joy of passengers, no doubt).

It's technically possible but it'll likely involve a lot of butchering and there's a probability the stock won't 'look right'.

No worries. For the record, the push-pull Mk3 sets were not modified from standard coaches; they were constructed specifically for that purpose.

I belive 121s did on rare occasions but it was mainly the preserve of the C class; their withdrawal followed not long after the last former AEC push-pull set was taken out of service. A class locos, as well as 141/181s and 071s were never fitted for push-pull working.

121-engined versions? I presume you mean the push-pull units that worked with the C class, as it'd be quite difficult to fit an EMD 567 under the floor! Anyway, the answer is that no AECs in any incarnation ever wore the Supertrain livery. They were Black & Tan right up until the withdrawal of the last push-pull units in the 1980s.

Indeed! Many thanks.

Unequivocal proof there, Josefstadt; Thanks for posting!

Is this the comment you're referring to? Ah jaysus... a job interview doesn't constitute an 'inside view', Ed! And besides, your last line about people just wanting to see trains run would actually justify the the "entirey commercial" attitude of the operation you complained about. Of course it was more important for them to have staff who were good with such visitors and could show them around, and maybe flog a few bits and pieces in the souvenir shop, rather than have someone who would spend their time rusting the tinplate on Fry's handbuilt locos with their drool! (A lesson they quite possibly learned through experience.) At the current juncture I don't know what you expect your TD to do about it because it's a local authority matter and judging by the article Eoin posted above and the feedback he has received, Fingal County Council have a plan in place for Casino House which is due to begin next summer. The project is already funded, so barring some unforeseen fiasco, the height of a TD's involvement is likely to be not much more than making a submission voicing support for the project once the planning application is lodged. You've contributed several posts to this thread with each one basically boiling down to 'I'll believe it when I see it and anyway I don't care about it' and not much else. Having made that point the first time round, there's no need to repeat it ad nauseam because it's not advancing any argument for or against. On the contrary, it smacks of sour grapes.

That's just beyond the bridge under the Strokestown Road/N5 on the Sligo side of Longford. It's pretty much an annual occurrence at this stage.

Spelling mistake... it's 'visitors', not 'vistiors'.

Good to see our marketing methods are working! As JB said, bubbles could be found operating on a wide range of routes, especially in the Black & Tan/Supertrain era.

Just to clarify... like the ballast wagons, they'll be sold in packs of three.

JB... funding secured via a legacy and site identified. The council's involvement mainly centres around the planning application. Everything else is being handled by a steering group, not directly by the council itself, as Eoin says above.

Local government is a multi-faceted operation, Ed. No reason why they can't progress the project while tackling other issues. </politics> Edit: Especially as private funding is already set aside for it. Cheers for that, Eoin!

So you're optimistic, then?

In 4mm/OO gauge, HOm track is close to OOn3 - or 3ft at 1:1 scale, so ideal for Irish narrow gauge. As Joe says above, Tillig produces dual gauge track.