Sean

only just seen this, oh why oh why must i not have a pot to piss in right now

Super thread noel. was about to start a thread about all the coupling woes i am having at present but said i would quickly ask here before going down a rabbit hole. the modern tension lock couplings do not suit my layout at all, far too often i am trying to couple up to my set rake lenghts and BAM the train is on a corner and it just wont work without manual intervention.(and if the hooks are on the wrong side of one another its a real hassle that potentially causes derails on opposing bends.) its not an issue on straight track and i dont think it was an issue 20 years ago on those big oversized hook and loop TLC's. never mind that, i DONT want to go back to those things in a million years. its 2022 now. if i fit the kadees do they work well on bends? when im referring to bends i merely mean a second radius track coming off a point to straighten the siding back out. so the train has to run through an "S" shape before it can touch a wagon.. seeing how much closer they bring the wagons too is also a big plus for me. finally, can the kadee be somehow wired into the DCC chip for remote uncoupling? I would much prefer this to having like 4/5 decoupling ramps littered around like my current plan calls for. cheers.

heres another one to throw into the mix. my previous layout. this is actually using the same baseboard as my current layout although one panel was removed to bring the length down. the last siding isnt finished in the first pic hence the second one to show it completed. this was to be a micro layout in that it was only 45cm wide. unfortunately i went a bit overboard and it ended up being 240cm long, mostly defeating any advantage gained by the micro size, the tight curves did present some technical issues with coupling also which i was never 100% happy with. deserves a mention however as the track plan is nearly identical to gorey on one of the old OS maps albeit with one less platform and shortened sidings. it was a very functional station with 2 loops and 3 sidings, and could handle decent sized trains once you stayed within loose goods era. was interesting visiting the station and being able to approximate where the old goods sidings were and seeing how they could have been accessed. a lot of the old trackwork looks to have survived right up to the IR period with the exception of the 2 sidings nearest the station so era wise things could be quite flexible on this one until the operator decides on a theme. the track plan itself leaves potential to have 4-5 consists on the layout at any one time, but lack of any type of fiddle yard in the design made this impractical, hence why a smaller scale may be desirable. definitely worth revisiting at some point in a smaller scale or with a wider board for proper radius curves and an actual fiddle yard.

Have been playing around with this idea for use as a beet hopper. It's not bad although the box may be a little short to be an accurate representation. Sean

No, we have spoken, now get to work on acquiring that tooling

no i mean, look closer at your 121, it has the bearings too.

your 121 should have rolling bearings and your A should have sprung buffers

cool idea for a thread, particularly like westport quay, its the basis for my own layout but using a different drawing, which was posted here a number of years ago, I too have tweaked away from the original design to accomodate a much later era but it still retains most of the original track design, the goods shed area is removed and the goods platform survives for loading hopper trains. you wouldnt really know by looking at it now that it used to be westport so i think that makes me a bit happier too. i managed to get a turntable in albeit not as long as one would normally be. and an oil depot siding. so things do deviate quite a bit. initially the level crossing had been down in the bottom right corner where there is now hard standing, this would have allowed me to turn this siding into a through road, to a smaller modular boxfile or somthing, which would have allowed me to change the use of the layout by simply changing out the box. settled for this design in the end though as i had a fairly rigid set of freight industry that i am interested in running. the size of this layout could be reduced dramatically if one decided to stick with small tank engines and loose coupled stock, however in this guise its a 90's terminus so the larger size was essential. the train does leave the scene whilst shunting as mentioned as a possible annoyance in an opening post. yes, but its a fairly long diesel consist doing pretty long shunts so if i was standing there with a camera in real life, similarly a large part of the train would go off scene during the clip.

a question on my lips for a while now that has piqued my interest with this thread. why not a regauge class 66? would that not have been cheaper than designing the 201 from scratch? i mean they are pretty similar locos under the hood right? in the last 20 years we have seen the 66 deployed accross europe and even into africa. The GL8 went all over the world with only minimal modifications, how come 201 had to be a bespoke design?

https://www.ebay.es/itm/304393992647?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110006%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20200818143230%26meid%3Ddb5e5f6910154eb5b13a3cf706675ae6%26pid%3D101224%26rk%3D5%26rkt%3D5%26sd%3D115275885680%26itm%3D304393992647%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDefaultOrganicWeb%26brand%3DHornby&_trksid=p2047675.c101224.m-1 lol.

Had a spare couple of hours tonight so I decided to make up the loading bay using leftover bits from the platform kit. Needs a few tweaks tomorrow to hide white bits but overall I'm pleased. Think it may be the first time that I've made a "thing" from scratch on the railway! I need to refinish that shed and then I'll be able to leave this end of the layout alone for a while until I get to the ballast. Ballast is probably the very last thing I'll do though since I want to add point motors later. Wiring will have to come soon though as I miss driving trains again! I think it is safe to say we are into one of my favourite parts of a layout build now, where we see the transform from a blank white Scape into something that actually at least half resembles a half realistic scene. also that siding track is filthy now, may have to liberate some clean track off the fiddle yard to replace it

I really like them when they are there but don't at all miss them we when they aren't. It's not like it's a big enough detail that I can see them spinning as the train drives around my room I actually see the moving bearing thing as a bit of a premium that Irish modellers are spoiled with. Every time you see an English review of a bit of Irish stock that has them It seems to take a while for the reviewer to actually notice they are there and then they think it's a brilliant innovation. Were they done first on irish rolling stock or do other brands of models also feature these?

rolling bearing boxes a big one for me. and the stay alive. i think i figured out number three the last time i was messing about but let me get back to you on that. no to 4 if it sacrifices too much speaker space. personally i would take the packaging and the handrails then from 141, both of these things are super annoying to me on the 121 release simply due to how delicate the model can be at times, particularly during unboxing. 141 still has plenty of detail picked out in fire wire but imo but it doesnt really work with the overall handrails due to how delicate they can be on 121. thats why IF there was a possibility of such a re run then it wouldnt exactly be the worst thing in the world. I know we are blowing hot air at this point because we know such a release is not possible, but i know id buy one (or 5 in a heartbeat). some of the big brands seem to be shamelessly selling the same tool at full whack for decades and people are buying them. yeah things are moving fast and every time when i see large %'s of the overall stock. preordered in days i keep coming back and saying that its only a matter of time. both IRM and PM both have other projects in progress atm though so i cant exactly see anything coming soon soon or maybe in the next couple of years. I too see it flying out in certain liveries whilst others might tend to hang around in stock for a longer period after this, like we see at the moment on the last of the 121's so careful consideration would be needed in chosing which ones to produce of course the lack of tooling is the main issue in all of this, and its why i dont see any sort of baby GM happening for a while but what about the 071 tool? surely murphy still has access to that and it would be much more likely to be the one we see getting a re run first? is his forthcoming 201 a retool or a re run?

relisted and sold again >.>

moo! the hill runs straight down onto the station platform, need to disguise the transition a bit better though, its grand for now! some sort of back wall for the platform will be needed here. that should add a bit of depth between the station and backscene a sizable enough station has been built for the size of the layout in fairness,and it will allow for some interesting passenger movement. a 2 coach and loco affair can serve the station on its own without issue, when the rpsi steam specials arrive the third coach wont fit into the loop so therefore as the steamer moves off to the turn table a pilot will have to step in and pull the coaches forward to clear the loop to allow the steamer to couple back into the back of the train. For GAA Days its possible to squeeze a 4 coach special into the station, however the additional coaches must be brought with the last passenger service the night before as the set needs to be split and shunted into a siding and then reassembled the next morning at the platform.(i have yet to try this but why not!) messing with the dapol shop to see how a station building might look, i think larger and low relief might be the way to go here though. its a big platform. looks like theres even room for the signal box! trying a different backscene from the range, its great that they all line up with one another, not glued down yet but it looks like a goer! getting ready to fence off the loading platform after a few incidents involving drunk fellas getting off the wrong side of the train after a few too many at the GAA! there is also ample edging left over from the platform kit that we can put to good use here.

interesting, you have me thinking that i cant help but wonder what it would sound like if you added a low pass filter just before the megabass. in theory you could drive the megabass a bit harder without the high frequencies going through it, any tinny high end sounds might be better handled by the sugarcube alone as that part of the sound would be translating poorly to the megabass and taking overhead from the low end sounds. same goes for the sugarcube, if you removed the low end frequencies below a certain point where the speaker cannot reproduce decent sounding bass it would clear up any muddiness in the higher end of things and you could drive the speaker a bit harder. the 2 speakers could sound a lot better overall if either one was carrying a different element of the sound and the end user was hearing a combination of both speakers tuned to their respective frequency ranges. i am not familliar with these micro speakers exactly, but in a home stereo speaker with a tweeter and bass cone this is how the speakers are usually configured internally. the circuit itself is simply made with a single capacitor and resistor, for all that waffle!. low pass high pass basically in either case, the value of the cap and resistor will set the cutoff frequency, a variable resistor can be used for messing around with cutoffs to develop an idea of what works and what doesnt. also youve got me curious about somthing else, are you just using bare speaker cones mounted into the loco or are any of them a bit more complex ie in little enclosures of any kind?

i actually strongly disagree with this, objectively speaking when i put 141 and 121 side by side at first the fit and finish of both products are to a high standard and very close, 121 has a few modern features like the spinning axles which in fairness are lovely but absolutely not essential(and easily added without a full retool),its nice on the irm flats too but i dont miss it on my ballast train. the ballast train arrived today, woops looks like i bought an old model by mistake? one key feature has me grabbing 141 again and again and its a particular bone of contention i hold with the finish of 121 and it was done for accuracys sake, the same feature on 141 is slightly less accurate but 100% more hard wearing so i actually prefer this on the "old" model. absolute accuracy isnt always best if its at the expense of the quality of the part being modelled. thats just like my opinion though, man. dont get me wrong, a brand new retooled baby GM is best for all, that being said i surely wouldnt shake a stick at a rerun of the old one, particularly if it could be done at a lower price point to discount all the R&D processes needed of a complete retool. its a very high quality model as is.

I must admit, as i have been a bit too preoccupied with things that are happening abroad , I totally forgot to document the scatter phase. A sure sign that I need to get trains running again to distract me! Oh well, at least it's lookin good. And the next care package of bits has arrived, cows, fences , walls and platform and some new wagons to keep things working. Not pictured is a selection of backscenes to work with. They are cheap so definitely worth buying extra ones. I can now put together the field as well as walling off the yard from.the street and finalising where everything will go. And so a whole gaggle of pway vehicles have arrived onsite in order to get construction moving. Remember, I'm building a 90s themed railway in 2022, so era does not hold any relevance just yet Track relaid minus turntable point as I just want to run trains now and the table is off being worked on elsewhere anyway so it's no Biggie for now. The other half of the layout is still bare but now for long. The only facility I haven't really done any work on yet is the fuelling area but that will be basic and mostly scratch built so more to come from that area soon.

withdrawn unfortunately, hopefully we can see a reslist soon.

Well to be honest with you its hearsay from this very forum. maybe "gone" is not correct but i am under the impression that it is with Bachmann and will not be used by murphy again. Do you mean from a finished product perspective, or a cost to manufacture perspective? in my opinion the baby GM are stunning and with the exception of a few modern features that did not exist when they came out i find myself preferring them to the later releases, if 121 and 141 were in simultaneous production at the moment and the exact same price i would see myself building up a fleet of 141 with maybe a couple of 121. I think thats partially due to my bias towards that particular loco as well though. I guess what im trying to say is that the fit and finish of the older tooling isn't an issue for me and i see it as better in a couple of ways.(there are certain aspects of 141 i would bring to 121 and aspects of 141 i would bring to 121 to make the perfect model so not complaining about either by any stretch) Yes i would be missing a few modern features but since im getting back into the hobby from early 2000's era hornby sets, everything i get is an upgrade to me right now! I also still buy scooter parts that were tooled 50 years ago(AND DAPOL KITS) so maybe im missing the relevance of it so much in the model industry.

its a shame those kits are gone there are a good few i would like to buy up now that im back in the hobby

Totally agree with this sentiment, I dont really care for the motive power which came from the UK and was not going to buy an A at all only for the fact that it kept getting such good reviews, fomo got the better of me and i was able to finally justify one due to them having such a widespread use on the network. I like them now thanks to having such a fine model on the shelf. I do however get the feeling that in such a small market that is centered around such a niche interest that there may well be some form of unwritten gentlemens agreement between PM and IRM which effectively states that the 2 firms will not develop competing products, ruling out any IRM made GM's for as long as PM stays in business, as such a small market would probabaly not sustain the same product from both manufacturers despite strong demand for those models and 071 has been a staple of the PM catalogue for many years now. So to that effect it will be upto paddy when we get to see new GM's hit the shelves... Considering that a 201 rerun is in the works, i think it's going to be more of a when than an if. as everyone seems to want 071 now that shes gone. Im less confident we will see more baby GM since the tooling is gone and needs redoing from scratch, but you never know..............

unacceptable! I will not rest until every single running number ever of 071 is available in toothpaste IR livery complete with the lighting features we have come to love , accuratrash sound, and rolling bearing boxes, then just as i have purchased 5 of each it will be time to open preorders for the same range of baby GM's let me dream

hopefully there will be enough interest for another run of GM's before then

Anybody else excited to see the last of these selling out? dying to see what IRM have planned next.(as if there wasnt enough coming already)