Murphy Models 121

[DiveController]

They would have ran equal distances with the 121 leading and trailing. It seems obvious that if the 121 lead on the outward journey, it would have trailed on the return journey.... (maybe trailed isn't the right word, but you get the picture..)

That's what I would have thought too. Maybe they're more aesthetically pleasing with the 121 in lead position and more photos exist in that configuration. Just my perception

 

Interesting photo of a mk2 with half tippex coupled to a mk3. The different shades of orange on the coaches is very clear in that pic.

We discussed this last week sometime. It's likely that there were several 'interim' liveries where logos and tippex (or half tippex, it seems) were added to existing base colors, whereas others locos and rolling stock may have had a full repaint with the same logos etc added. It's likely that probably accounts for the debate as to the exact livery color when any of these are seen in isolation (plus lighting, background etc as additional confounders)

Edited January 14, 2016 by DiveController

[irishthump]

There's a 121 shades of orange standing on the wall . . .

 

Back on thread, any idea if the NEM sockets on the new 121s might be on the body or the bogies?

 

I doubt very much if they would body mount the coupler pockets. It's not the norm for UK outline.

[GSR 800]

I thought they were turned at termini,and larger stations?

[DiveController]

We were referring to when they were run in consist with another baby GM (or 121) and the pair would have run around

[Noel]

We were referring to when they were run in consist with another baby GM (or 121) and the pair would have run around

 

That's why I plan to buy three. One pair nose2nose and one to consist with a 141/181. There were only 15 x 121s, but 49 baby GMs so I'd eventually like to keep the ratio looking similarly proportionate on the layout. (3 x 121s : 10 x babies). But I might break that rule to have a single delivery grey 121 in a display case.

[GSR 800]

We were referring to when they were run in consist with another baby GM (or 121) and the pair would have run around

 

So like this?

[Noel]

So like this?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22128[/ATTACH]

No, they didn't run like that in the IR/IE era. The nose of the 121 was always facing the other loco in the consist. They stayed coupled as pairs and ran around trains in pairs.

[DiveController]

This is an unusual shot. Normally the 121 bonnet would be facing the baby GM. Who knows what happening here? Maybe the 121 has failed and being towed by the baby, who knows.

[RedRich]

I was planning the same consist maybe even the 121 as the second loco. It seems that they usually ran with the 121 leading with its high cab. I have seen them the other way with the 121 against the train which looks a little odd, the high cab like the windows of an observation coach on American outline rolling stock

 

Looking at these pics I would say that it arrived from Waterford with 134 leading. It came off the Waterford line and pushed the train into the junction where the locos were uncoupled, ran around and re coupled at the Mallow end with 144 becoming the lead loco.

 

 

 

Rich,

[aclass007]

This is an unusual shot. Normally the 121 bonnet would be facing the baby GM. Who knows what happening here? Maybe the 121 has failed and being towed by the baby, who knows.

 

A likely possibility... As you say, they wouldn't have normally ran like that.

 

Edit: Looking at it again, is that an 071 up front? Which would almost certainly point to a failed 121, as 071's never ran in multiple...

Edited January 13, 2016 by aclass007

[GSR 800]

A likely possibility... As you say, they wouldn't have normally ran like that.

 

Edit: Looking at it again, is that an 071 up front? Which would almost certainly point to a failed 121, as 071's never ran in multiple...

 

No,it's 177

[aclass007]

No,it's 177

 

I'll bet money it's an 071.....

[David]

No,it's 177

 

That's an 071. No question about it.

[GSR 800]

That's an 071. No question about it.

 

After noticing some 071 like details on it.. The pic was just labelled wrong

[Blaine]

No, they didn't run like that in the IR/IE era. The nose of the 121 was always facing the other loco in the consist. They stayed coupled as pairs and ran around trains in pairs.

 

Nonsense - They did run alone, both with MK3 pushpull stock and on freights - even nose 1st on the Barrack St line, see here http://eiretrains.com/Photo_Gallery/Railway%20Stations%20B/Barrack%20Street/IrishRailwayStations.html#

[DiveController]

Nonsense - They did run alone, both with MK3 pushpull stock and on freights - even nose 1st on the Barrack St line, see here http://eiretrains.com/Photo_Gallery/Railway%20Stations%20B/Barrack%20Street/IrishRailwayStations.html#

Absolutely correct, Ed. They did run singly and mostly cab first except for certain areas like Barrack St. and Connolly-Inchicore. I think Noel was referring to the usual arrangement when they ran in pairs which would also have been cabs outwards. Other than when they were first in early service, it seems like the only place where the 121s would have run bonnet first were in low speed areas, yards etc or where an additional additional observer was available

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22134[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22135[/ATTACH]

Absolutely smashing shots, Rich, REALLY like those:tumbsup:

134 doesn't look as 'odd' when coupled to the (over)laden double beets like that. In my original post, I was thinking more of coaching stock which seem to approximate the height of a 141/181 cab

Edited January 14, 2016 by DiveController

[Noel]

... I think Noel was referring to the usual arrangement when they ran in pairs ...

 

Yes that was rather obvious

[Mayner]

Looking at these pics I would say that it arrived from Waterford with 134 leading. It came off the Waterford line and pushed the train into the junction where the locos were uncoupled, ran around and re coupled at the Mallow end with 144 becoming the lead loco.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22134[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]22135[/ATTACH]

 

Rich,

 

I had to do a double take when I saw the photo, I chased a similar consist with 129 & 142 from Waterford to the Junction on the 2002 Oct Holiday weekend!

 

The locos propelled the train from the Limerick Line onto the North platform road before running round, further shunting took place with the Beet shunted to the Down Main line to free up the platform roads for up and down passenger trains.

 

Ten years earlier during an acute loco shortage single headed 121s worked two fertiliser trains out of Cork on a summer Saturday afternoon, before the 17:30 Dublin Passenger, the 1st made it to the Junction the second to Rathpeacon before being shunted clear of the main line for the passenger.

 

Apart on the ban on long hood running the Straffan p.w. bogie collision lead to one of the 1st modifications to the class the fitting of louvers to the cab doors.

[Junctionmad]

Apart on the ban on long hood running the Straffan p.w. bogie collision lead to one of the 1st modifications to the class the fitting of louvers to the cab doors.

 

 

???. what did that do, to prevent them running into pw bogies !!!

 

 

I was wondering , did the single brake cylinder act on both wheels or was only one wheel/axle braked ?

[UP6936]

???. what did that do, to prevent them running into pw bogies !!!

 

 

I was wondering , did the single brake cylinder act on both wheels or was only one wheel/axle braked ?

 

It made it easier for drivers to hear detonators exploding, thus warning them of the presence of a bogie.

[Garfield]

???. what did that do, to prevent them running into pw bogies !!!

 

 

I was wondering , did the single brake cylinder act on both wheels or was only one wheel/axle braked ?

 

It was an attempt to allow more external sound to enter the cab, so that the drivers would hear the detonators.

[jhb171achill]

Point for modellers - prior to the advent of the "supertrains" in 1972 - in other words during the great and black'n'tan eras - 121s generally ran singly, but cab first. This is why so many turntables outlived the steam era. They were turned in many places.

[Eiretrains]

On some less common occasions you would have a pair of 121 locomotives working with both cabs facing forward, not the usual familiar formation. Heavy mineral traffic and other freight developments from the late 1960s onwards gave further reasons for multiple working to be adopted on the 121 locomotives.

[RedRich]

Absolutely correct, Ed. They did run singly and mostly cab first except for certain areas like Barrack St. and Connolly-Inchicore. I think Noel was referring to the usual arrangement when they ran in pairs which would also have been cabs outwards. Other than when they were first in early service, it seems like the only place where the 121s would have run bonnet first were in low speed areas, yards etc or where an additional additional observer was available

 

 

 

Absolutely smashing shots, Rich, REALLY like those:tumbsup:

134 doesn't look as 'odd' when coupled to the (over)laden double beets like that. In my original post, I was thinking more of coaching stock which seem to approximate the height of a 141/181 cab

 

Dive I do have a clear memory of seeing a pic of 184 and 135 leaving Connolly with a MK11 Aircon set and 184 was the leading loco. I think it was very early 90's. If anyone else has any info or a pic relating to it I would be delighed to see it.

 

Rich,

[DiveController]

On some less common occasions you would have a pair of 121 locomotives working with both cabs facing forward, not the usual familiar formation.

May have been that a second 121 came to assist with the train and happened to be facing the other way. Wouldn't have been a problem until they reached the other end when one would have to be turned. Only advantage in being faced opposite ways already would be to speed up the run around

 

Dive I do have a clear memory of seeing a pic of 184 and 135 leaving Connolly with a MK11 Aircon set and 184 was the leading loco. I think it was very early 90's. If anyone else has any info or a pic relating to it I would be delighed to see it.

 

Rich,

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'm sure that was the case. When coupled to a a baby GM it would make absolute sense that the 121 would lead one direction and the baby the other. My only observation was that when the baby led, the cab height of the 121 would be higher than the coaching stock in the 'middle' of the formation. Yes, would be a nice photo to see though.

 

Anyway isn't a 121 technically a baby GM too?

[bufferstop]

The first 121 to be fitted for multiple working was 121 in Sept 1973, it took nearly another two years before the entire class was converted.

 

The handrails on the 121 catwalks were fitted from 1971 onwards

[jhb171achill]

 

The handrails on the 121 catwalks were fitted from 1971 onwards

 

So, in black'n'tan livery, most of that time was spent without handrails. Thus, a black'n'tan one with handrails is very specific 1971-3. If the production model has them, and the modeller wanted 1965-ish to 1971, just remove them.

[Eiretrains]

May have been that a second 121 came to assist with the train and happened to be facing the other way. Wouldn't have been a problem until they reached the other end when one would have to be turned. Only advantage in being faced opposite ways already would be to speed up the run around.

No it just so happened to be facing that way under normal circumstance, probably formed out of convenience when no other loco was available and no way of turning it around. Indeed it had the disadvantage on arrival when one couldn't run around and return properly.

[DiveController]

Yes, that's what I was trying to say. possibly no way of turning it at the point of origin, but hopefully at the destination. Lots of modeling possibilities

[flange lubricator]

The first 121 to be fitted for multiple working was 121 in Sept 1973, it took nearly another two years before the entire class was converted.

 

 

The fitting of multiple working took longer than that perhaps it was done as the locos were in the shops for overhauls by early 1976 only 11 of the class were fitted 122,128,125 and B132 remaining unconverted of these 125 was the last to be done in early 1978 .

[DiveController]

Did multiple working require the presence of a physical electrical/electronic connection between the two locomotives? I'm hazarding a guess that it may be the socket inboard of the light cluster (on 144) in this photo?? It is not present on grey or B'n'T 121s but seen in general terms in IR & IE liveried 121s. Is there an extensible connector or a connecting lead kept somewhere on each loco?

Edited January 15, 2016 by DiveController

[Railer]

Did multiple working require the presence of a physical electrical/electronic connection between the two locomotives? I'm hazarding a guess that it may be the socket inboard of the light cluster (on 144) in this photo?? It is not present on grey or B'n'T 121s but seen in general terms in IR & IE liveried 121s. Is there an extensible connector or a connecting lead kept somewhere on each loco?

 

Yes, all GM locos need the MU cable between them for multiple working, it's the same as the cable used for push pull mode. 121 and 135 were not modified for push pull working at all, well 121 was and then it was removed due to very high noise and revs from the loco when in push pull mode for some reason.

[Railer]

The first 121 to be fitted for multiple working was 121 in Sept 1973, it took nearly another two years before the entire class was converted.

 

The handrails on the 121 catwalks were fitted from 1971 onwards

 

Thanks for that info, I've been searching the net and books for the past few days trying to find that out. Same with the air brake hoses.

[BSGSV]

In addition to the multi-sockets and air pipes, the 121's were also fitted with the high-vacuum pipe for (AEC conversion) push-pull working. It can be seen to the left of the screw coupling. The later Mk.3 P/P saw door controls and an additional changeover switch fitted in the cab.

 

On the subject of uni-directional 121's, a poor 1986 shot of the first Up Sligo arriving in Dublin. Locos are 123 and 129. When released, the locos went 129 nose leading to the shed.

Edited January 15, 2016 by BSGSV

[jhb171achill]

Latterly, nose-to-nose pairing, either with another 121 or a 141 / 181, was universal.

 

While it was also very much the norm going back to the early 70s, exceptions did occur, though very rarely. On a single occasion about 1976 or so, I saw a pair on a passenger train with both cabs forward.

 

It's a bit like their earlier nose-first single running. It happened, but very exceptionally rarely. The Dundalk Barrack St. branch was one location where it happened the odd time if a 121 was on the North Wall - Dundalk goods and went down there with a wagon or two.

 

In a similar fashion, 80 class railcars were never mixed in traffic with Castle class 450s. They had different connections. However, on one occasion after a bomb scare somewhere, I saw an 80 in use as a passenger train just after the line reopened, hauling a Castle which was tagged onto the train but closed off with no passengers in it.

 

Thus a 6-car NIR train: 3 X 80 car, and 3 X Castle class.

 

No, Maedb never went tender first - even once!