Sean

Speculators profiteer from Collectors. A hobbyist might be happy to only ever own one loco and a loop of track with some wagons. definitely a very wide demographic to paint everyone with one type of brush.

......Yes please.

AS models ordered from irishrailwaymodels.com get posted from Dublin in my experience and are delivered in 24 hours. and besides, Accurascale is a part of Irish Railway Models

I am exactly like this. its definitely what drives my desire to build micros instead of big massive layouts.

There is no saving as far i know as the price you are seeing on accurascale.com is ex VAT and dispatched from the UK.... IRM prices are inc VAT. Customs will still sting you for that VAT on arrival into Ireland plus the delivery will take a little bit longer. the sites are configured to show different prices based on the users location based on tax payable.

I agree at 185 its not for me however I am a railway modeller and I am more than happy with having a single oxford bus eireann mass produced yoke sitting somewhere on the layout. with my ERA and set and setting being very rural also, it would look silly for me to populate the layout with obscure Dublin busses. (anyone modelling outside the big smoke will probabaly also have a similar sort of opinion) that being said, model busses a huge niche of their own and these models should do well going by their history. had I actually lived in dublin during the times that these busses were zooming around i would probabaly have a lot more desire for one. Models of trucks in irish Liveries seem to follow along a similar style of model releases also. Local crane hire company near me has models available of their fleet but prices are comparable enough to these.

my reorder came to 145 so i was just under that limit

they process the customs data before the pack even gets out of the UK.......

I think the issue is more so that loads of us have been getting stuff off hattons problem free for ages because they had everything set up properly for EU trade and now all of a sudden it seems like ALL of their stuff is being returned from Ireland and leaving customers stuck in limbo for a month or more. the other channels they are using to send stuff to Ireland are all working fine albeit at a much higher cost. Surely all of this back and forth of packages is causing a lot of extra work and expense for RM anpost and Both sets of customs as well as hattons themselves, and theres absolutely no warning for the buyers until they find out their package has been rejected and may well spend the next month sitting around doing nothing.

The big question I have is just WHY oh WHY havent hattons suspended domestic mailing to ireland when this seems to be an ongoing issue effecting a lot of their customers. someone suggested using addresspal the other day as a work around. skips all this bullshit and the package gets imported properly and actually delivered.

I would have liked to have seen her out in the modern grey livery. didnt like it at first but then i did. thought the same about the delivery grey livery.

Amazing, Thanks for this.

if they can squeeze it all into the 121 im sure theres enough space within the slightly larger 141 shell. Presumably the chassis will have some level of similarity to those as well. also would hope for an all new range of running numbers given the way things are in that regard now. would also mean that the older ones are still just as collectable after these come out.

i reckon the handrails commonly got broken and then removed entirely among the younger modellers who didnt fully know how to handle models just yet I have a love hate relationship with them

Rumor has it theres the same body shell, reworked bogies, a speaker and "a few other tweaks here and there." Assumedyly this means they will have updated the pcb also to seperate the head and marker lights but thats just speculation from me really, for the new bogie i would assume we just get 121 bogies. the hand rails and wipers on the current 141/181 range also feels very dated to me, so assumedly these will be updated to suit more modern modelling standards although im also kinda hoping any spares will be compatible with the older models and i doubt MM would be able to do both of these things but we never know until they arrive with us.

as discussed in my last post, it really did only make sense to tidy this area up and to turn the passing loop into a tight inner siding. Down the other end ive torn out the PWD yard and tidied up the trackage into the goods yard. this has allowed me to stretch out my running loop by almost double the amount of straight. n gauge layout jacked up and back-scene added, this gives me approx 5x1 feet to create a nice little scenic branch line section on a blank canvas that fits in perfectly with the theme of everything else.

https://webapps.geohive.ie/mapviewer/index.html this site is a great resource for old maps and satellite imagery going way back

The most obvious difference in these motors is the number of cylinders but most people cannot seem to hear a difference in this regard. the other less obvious difference is the 181 series were supercharged whereas the 071 series are turbo. Perhaps 076 was given an odd configuration for some reason that we dont know about or maybe the overall configuration of them has changed, im sure someone more knowledgable than me will come along and fill in the gaps soon enough

PLENTY of videos around of Cummins, Perkins, Wilson etc generators around but with a massive variance in sizes, cummins nt400 seems a very common type of genny from the 70's-2000ish era of manufacture, particularly the nt400 line which i am seeing a lot of listings for. What kind of power output would these things have actually had in order to be able to reliably power a full train? would this be a good ballpark guesstimate of the type of thing i am looking for? Sean

I think theres a bit more to it than this though, I have been looking into the same thing on and off for about a year, as well as testing alternative solutions such as virtual sound decoders, both on mobile and pc. no solution performs as well as a proper esu chip with B-EMF feedback in my experience for me the biggest issue has been making up solutions actually small enough to fit inside of a loco shell but even if i do knock something up I will then have no real software to run on it and would also have to develop this on top of the device. if we break down the individual components of a sound chip also, the price we actually pay for the sound element of the chip is not all that much.. maybe 50-60 euros, for that we are getting the industry standard in sound design software and build quality. its 26 euro for a blank lokpilot, there are cheaper options available, but the difference in features and running quality is quickly apparent and you quickly see where the money goes. a blank loksound fx is 64 at the moment and a blank full featured loksound goes for 94. on top of this we are usually also paying approximately 30 euro for the sound project from a third party who will supply everything set up and ready to go. you can get around this by making your own project and asking the retailer to flash it for you but only some retailers will. I can also spend zero and use a virtual sound decoder but tbh i find them quite shit and not worth the time. so 60 euro, thats what i really consider the cost of adding sound to a loco, beyond that im getting the best motor control on the market and paying a sound engineer for his time spent in the field recording and building up the project afterwards. I actually have a keen interest in digging deeper on this and if you want to continue the conversation and possibly share where we are at with it dont hesitate to PM me. I dont think bike are a good analogy as prices will vary massively by brand and as you get into bigger CC's bikes are more of a luxury than a utilitarian product and things are priced accordingly. 2 tyres for some of my bikes cost more than 4 decent car tyres. batteries in particular would be a more mass produced subsection of automotive parts and would be priced based on their size rather than any sort of perceived demand. All that being said, to bring this full circle you have reminded me of 2 good examples of why the cost of these things are so high. Back when i started riding about 15 years ago any new learner had to restrict their bike to 33BHP or essentially they were riding unlicensed. different limits today but essentially the same system applies with different rules and regs. in order to make a lot of bikes "learner legal" they had to be fitted with a restriction kit that usually consisted of a few large washers within the throttle bodys to essentially make them smaller or sometimes it would be a small bracket that prevents the rider going full throttle, or a combo of both. Anyway it eventually became the case that you needed one of these kits installed and certified by a mechanic in order to be able to take out insurance on a larger bike, but there was only one manufacturer of these kits, and they had somehow lobbied the industry to only accept their kits and certification's, which cost an outrageous 300 euro with no alternative available whatsoever. I worked in a bike garage at the time and often complained to the owner about this who used to complain back stating that the company have massive R&D costs as they have to develop solutions specific to every single bike that is released. so fair enough i thought, i much prefer small cc yokes anyway than strangling down a bigger yoke. Eventually someone did copy their designs and started selling them on ebay with his own certificates for 50 quid, got one of these myself and the bike ran alot worse than it would of with one of the expensive kits, I also had trouble getting the certificate recognised by my insurance co who had never seen one of these before and i was actually turned away from being able to sit my driving test due to having one, eventually i did see where the extra 250 notes was going to with the dear kits. on the other hand, i used to tune 2 stroke mopeds when i was younger and this is where the difference in part prices can come very apparent, a racing cylinder built to the same specification of an OEM one could sometimes cost double or triple the price despite being built sometimes even in the same plant from the same processes. (one example would be Malossi racing cylinders having the same "brevatto" casting on them as the OEM vespa cylinders) OEM will be producing millions of these whereas the tuning firm might be producing them in the hundreds or thousands, tuning firm have also spent considerable time refining the OEM design for all out performance or a balance of more performance and reliability, it is not uncommon for a cylinder to cost 5 or 6 times the price of the OEM one. so whilst that is a bit of a ramble the final point is simple, of that 60 euro approx cost to add esu sound to a loco, how much of that 60 is going towards the software engine on the chip and further R&D to improve it? you are buying more than just the hardware when you want to add sound to a loco.

As i was saying earlier. i think these things are just a bit too loud for my size of room, after all you can hear the sounds of engine tickover over the sound of people talking at a busy exhibition hall, so the speakers are capable of spreading their sound over a particularly large radius which all in all is only a good thing. So i started messing with my master volume CV and settled on a baseline of around 70 for each loco (default is 192) definitely suiting the room better now and im more spatially aware of where a loco is and they sound distant when they are at the other side of the room. BUT when i fired up three chips together the sounds didn't all sing together and there seemed to be decent separation between all of the speakers. noticed a big difference in the 2 sounds when locos are coupled up and with decoder pro open on program on main I was able to tweak the volume of these 2 locos on the fly and it allowed me to set up a nice and balanced mix between the two locomotives. This definitely merits further investigation, however that can be for another night, i need more loksounds

as far as i understand it theres a little more to it than this. only a select few units initially got the whole 645 transplant whereas later the entire fleet was fitted out with 645 cylinders and liners for parts standardisation, the latter fitout would not really have changed the overall sound of things as it was still mostly a 567 motor with the same power output so it kept that characteristic 567 sound. I also see reports of at least 181 getting a 567 sp i think by the end there was a good mixture of engines and sounds in service together, open to correction on that though. ive actually gotten two MM 567 chips that i assume are from different batches and they both contain 2 completely different prime mover recordings. so its proving useful for experimentation. ive been messing around with both sound decoders as well as watching videos from yourself and others and i have been taking notes of why people dont like running 2 sound chips together and ways that could be improved on including old suggestions from legoman on RMweb for getting nice sound into 2 consisted locos. I definitely get what your saying about all the sounds melding together into one big mess but i really do think this can be overcome with a little tuning of CV's as there are videos of american locos with 2 prime movers onboard and running independantly on a single loksound and these sound quite good. not sure if these locos are fitted out with multiple speakers or not but theres only one audio out on the loksound as far as i know so all speakers would be playing the exact same sound. they even have the response from the movers delayed different amounts at throttle change so you dont hear that weird resonance when they both notch down to idle at the exact same rpm/time Funnily enough that you mention the doppler effect, I definitely am hearing one when i run a train around although because im in a box room running around a 6x4 loop even when the loco is furthest from where i am sitting the prime mover is still unrealistically loud to me and i really have to listen out for it. the microphone on my phones camera really does not like the volume either, despite neither of them overpowering my ears when listened to. I actually think all of these issues are intrinsicly linked and can be solved. going down the rabbit hole tonight, will report back.

This is a great bit of info a definitely what I was looking for, would the generators have been of a standardised nature once they started to replace them? ie when switching to cummins would they have fitted the same model of cummins across the entire fleet in order to reduce their parts inventory? were they all of a similar size in terms of footprint and output power? Mostly i am interested in what was in the re built dutch vans although the project could easily replicate any of the GSV's with the right sound recording. if they all used a similar sort of engine at any given time then of course that would greatly cut down on the required amount of work and research.

The google machine is telling me that the FG wilson gennys in general used perkins engines and heres a further elaboration; FG seem to be an Irish based company and both are a subsidiary of caterpillar now, very plausible that these were more widely used than believed, its a good starting point for me, Im strongly thinking about building an inexpensive sound capsule to suit these vehicles.