Hi everyone,
I've recently designed a sort of shunting puzzle layout which uses transporter wagons to add an extra level of interest/difficulty. It probably needs a few tweaks still but I'm now looking at prototype transporter wagons and how they're operated.
Having seen videos and photos of transporter wagons in Continental Europe, I understand that some of them can be loaded and unloaded with a complete train of standard gauge wagons pushed over adjacent transporters as needed, as in this video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fb4K8UyphHA&feature=emb_title (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fb4K8UyphHA&feature=emb_title)
Padarn Railway host wagons, on the other hand, had to be individually loaded, one at a time (I realise these are slightly different as they're narrow-on-wider gauge, rather than the other way round, but the need to load wagons onto other wagons of a different gauge still applies).
My question is about Calthrop-style transporters, as used on the Leek & Manifold. Did these have to be individually loaded or could the wagons be run over adjacent transporters, as with the Continental ones in the video?
For my shunting layout concept it seems like it would be more interesting to operate if they have to be individually loaded, and technically easier to make work in model form. I realise that both the Meridian and Centre Models transporter wagon kits are out of production though so it might be difficult to source L&M-style transporters, unless anyone has 3D printed anything relevant more recently.
Having watched bits of that video it looks like each bogie standard gauge (SG) wagons are carried on 2 bogie narrow gauge (NG) transporter wagons (one NG per SG bogie), with the 2 NG wagons linked by a long coupling bar - it also looks like a similar bar is used between the NG wagons under adjacent SG wagons so that the train is not using the SG couplings.
Consequently running the SG train off the NG transporters needs a lot of shunting as the SG stock is removed one bogie at a time and the NG coupling bars taken out so the NG transporter wagons can have their deck rails linked so that the SG stock further from the 'ramp can be run across the NG wagons. I think that this kind of operation would be very difficult to model in 009 (or HOe), though it could be done with a single NG transporter wagon (carrying a single 4 wheel SG truck).
The other method of transporting SG stock on NG lines in Europe is the Rollblock - a small 4 wheel NG truck that supports the SG wagon's axle. With this system inclined SG ramps are used to lower the SG wagons on to the NG ones so it can be done (semi) automatically, and the train relies on the SG couplings (the NG rollblocks are not coupled). Because of this it may be easier to use rollblocks in model format than transporter wagons (no need to remove couplings from the NG bits under the SG train to unload that from the NG), but if your plan is to stick with a single 4 wheel SG van/truck at a time then there's no advantage to using Rollblocks. In fact I think the system of ramps would take up a lot more space than an 'end on SG siding NG transporter connection'.
The Leek & Manifold transporter wagons initially carried 4 wheel SG wagons, but later some of the NG transporters were lengthened (or built new) to take 6 wheel SG stock (so bogie SG stock was not carried). Whilst more than one SG wagon + NG transporter may have been in an NG train, I think that the SG + NG wagons would have been shunted to be loaded / unloaded individually rather than SG wagons being run across an empty NG transporter to get to the SG siding.
A couple of other thoughts is that on the L&M the shunting of the SG stock would have been done by human or horse power, or by attaching a rope (or using a pole) and the NG engine, all of which are a bit difficult to model. That being said I have a feeling that I've seen someone who got this to work by fitting a small motor to the SG wagons so it could move itself on and off the transporter wagon, but he only had one transporter wagon & a single SG truck (so no need to run across multiple NG transporters).
One note of caution about the white metal Center Models kit, and the subsequent Meridian Models version cast in resin. The standard gauge was to EM (18.3 mm) gauge rather than OO (16.5mm), probably to give more room for the NG bogies to swing under the transporter wagon body.
I can't imagine that nobody has done a 3D printed version (but I couldn't find one on Shapeways!) but given how simple the transporter wagon is - central spine to fit between the SG wheel backs with 'wings' with a flange groove to support the wheels - I can't imagine that scratch building one from plastic sheet would be too difficult. However, as OO is that little bit narrower than EM (or P4) the lack of space will make life difficult when it comes to the typical 009 curves.
Hope that helps.
Quote from: JulienW on March 01, 2022, 10:35
Having watched bits of that video it looks like each bogie standard gauge (SG) wagons are carried on 2 bogie narrow gauge (NG) transporter wagons (one NG per SG bogie), with the 2 NG wagons linked by a long coupling bar - it also looks like a similar bar is used between the NG wagons under adjacent SG wagons so that the train is not using the SG couplings.
Consequently running the SG train off the NG transporters needs a lot of shunting as the SG stock is removed one bogie at a time and the NG coupling bars taken out so the NG transporter wagons can have their deck rails linked so that the SG stock further from the 'ramp can be run across the NG wagons. I think that this kind of operation would be very difficult to model in 009 (or HOe), though it could be done with a single NG transporter wagon (carrying a single 4 wheel SG truck).
Yes, I noticed that - virtually impossible to model in 009 given the need to fiddle around with coupler bars. But if the L&M wagons cannot be unloaded and loaded in this way anyway then I should be fine just using that type of wagon - for my purposes I'd prefer a design that can only be unloaded one at a time anyway.
I also knew about the rollbocks but they're not quite right for my idea.
I appreciate the information about the gauge on the kits that have been issued - I knew the width of the standard gauge was an issue with these wagons but hadn't realised the kits were manufactured with the gauge already set.
I'm not looking to construct a set-up that exactly replicates the L&M, I just think their design of wagon is better for what I have in mind than the European ones that are available ready to run. I will probably use a small standard gauge loco to haul off the standard gauge wagons, onto a siding that looks as though it might be part of a slightly larger system. With that in mind I'm tempted to create my own slightly freelance design of transporter, possibly with inside frames, and build to suit. I can't remember if the L&M wagons have bogies but I think a 4-wheel design would also be more suitable for my project.
We tried to do this during the planning stage of Westdorf using the Liliput H0e transporter wagons and loading one wagon at a time.
The problems we had were uncoupling the standard gauge wagon remotly and also holding the SG wagon on the NG wagon for its trip on the narrow gauge.
For the couplings we experimented with a retractable 'ramp' of sorts as well as magnets. None worked well enough.
For holding the SG wagon on the NG one we tried several methods including magnets various blocks on the NG wagon and even springs to hold the SG wheels in place, again none worked well.
In the end we gave up and allthough there is a transfer siding on Westdorf and we run transporter wagons with standard gauge wagons on them they are fixed to the narrow gauge transporters.
As mentioned above there is also an issue with the room for any 9mm gauge bogies between the wheel flanges of the standard gauge wagons.
All that said I have seen it done!
Quote from: B.Meldon on March 01, 2022, 13:32
We tried to do this during the planning stage of Westdorf using the Liliput H0e transporter wagons and loading one wagon at a time.
The problems we had were uncoupling the standard gauge wagon remotly and also holding the SG wagon on the NG wagon for its trip on the narrow gauge.
For the couplings we experimented with a retractable 'ramp' of sorts as well as magnets. None worked well enough.
For holding the SG wagon on the NG one we tried several methods including magnets various blocks on the NG wagon and even springs to hold the SG wheels in place, again none worked well.
In the end we gave up and allthough there is a transfer siding on Westdorf and we run transporter wagons with standard gauge wagons on them they are fixed to the narrow gauge transporters.
As mentioned above there is also an issue with the room for any 9mm gauge bogies between the wheel flanges of the standard gauge wagons.
All that said I have seen it done!
For uncoupling, I was hoping to use some form of delayed uncoupling so that the SG wagons are effectively uncoupled before loading and just need to be shoved onto the transporter wagon.
The other issue you mention, holding the SG wagons on the transporter while still allowing them to be rolled off when needed, is the bit that concerns me most about this. I did wonder if you could have some sort of coupling hook arrangement on the transporter itself, to anchor the standard gauge wagon in place, but this obviously introduces its own complications as it would need to be uncoupled to release the wagon for unloading.
We did try the Marklin 'Relex' couplings that have a cover over the pins and give good delayed ucoupling. This worked to some extant, however we found that as with the 009 couplings height was critical also the standard gauge couplings had to be far enough onto the transporter wagon to clear the next narrow gauge vehicle. They were useless as couplings between the wagons once on the transporters, mainly down to the radius of the curves on the narrow gauge and not being able to uncouple them again once they were on the transporters.
To make maters worse the Liliput H0e transporter wagons have six wheel bogies with inside bearings, these do not run freely at all.
The result is when loaded with a standard gauge wagon they are somwhat heavy for the NG locos to pull and we have 1 in 30 grades on Westdorf. Because of this we had to change the bogies for free running outside frame bogies and as I mentioned in a previous post there is not enough room for these to swing between the flanges of the 16.5mm wagons. The end solution to this was to use Egger log bolster bogies with Roco wheels and with the corners filled down. (The egger log bolsters have more rounded ends than the Roco ones.) But even that was not quite enough for 12 inch curves so the standard gauge wagons that are permentaly attached to the trans porters have the lower section of their wheel flanges removed!! You will also see that the couplings are attached to the bogies, this was the only way we could make them work and be able to be uncoupled on the narrowagauge.
Here is a photo of the transporter wagon showing the clips that hold the SG wagon in place. The chocks that can be seen are not enough to do this.
......and the transfer siding. The SG box wagon that is in use is a bit of a cheat! It has a lower roof than most other SG wagons. However, it still looks very tall when in a narrow gauge train.
...and a view from the other direction. Both the NG and SG wagons can be shuntted into these sidings and uncoupled, but they can not go from SG to NG.
QuoteI appreciate the information about the gauge on the kits that have been issued - I knew the width of the standard gauge was an issue with these wagons but hadn't realised the kits were manufactured with the gauge already set.
From memories of seeing both kits on the sales stand in the past (several years ago!) the transporter 'deck' (the central spine and wings supporting the SG wheels) is cast in one piece with flange way groves for the SG wheels to run in. I suspect the original Center Models jobs weighed a ton being cast in white metal, hence the change to resin for the Meridian version.
I suspect the main issue in converting one to take an OO gauge wagon would be that the central spine would be too wide to fit the narrower back to back (EM versus OO).
Unfortunately I can't recall how the NG bogies were constructed, but it would not surprise me if they were inside frame on the kit (regardless of what the prototype used) to allow for a bit more swing on curves.
As an alternative to scratch building something of my own design, are any of the RTR H0e wagons based on prototype designs that can only be loaded individually?
Bemo used to make kits of the German Rollbock system that could be used to carry standard gauge wagons. They could be set up to load and unload using the ramps that they made. Not easy to get now. I am looking for a ramp myself having got about 6 sets of the rollbock units.
https://youtu.be/bsb49HNZHCA (https://youtu.be/bsb49HNZHCA)
Addition: The Bemo website shows the rollböcke being reintroduced in both H0e and H0m gauges in 3rd quarter of 2022 at €39.95 a pair.
Quote from: danny on March 03, 2022, 07:59
As an alternative to scratch building something of my own design, are any of the RTR H0e wagons based on prototype designs that can only be loaded individually?
I suspect the difference comes down to the type of couplings used and how long they are in relation to the ends of the SG rails on the transporter.
I'd also suggest that most people in the UK looking at a model of a European (HOe) transporter wagon would know the difference between one that could have SG stock run across it and one that couldn't, or even that SG stock could be run across more than one NG transporter.
And if there was only one NG transporter wagon available on the prototype line (i.e. all others in use) then it would have to be loaded/unloaded individually, wouldn't it?
Quote from: JulienW on March 01, 2022, 10:35I have a feeling that I've seen someone who got this to work by fitting a small motor to the SG wagons so it could move itself on and off the transporter wagon.
I was just thinking about this (as I've finally got round to having another go at planning the layout idea that this is for and trying to solve some of the problems) and I seem to remember seeing an article about self-powered wagons that run themselves on and off the transporters in the 009 News. I thought this was fairly recent (within the last 3 to 5 years), but so far I've got as far back as 2016 and not found the article I'm thinking of. Does anyone know which issue it's in? I realise it may be embedded in a larger article, causing me to miss it, or it may have been something I saw elsewhere, but I thought it was worth asking if anyone else knew as I'm sure it was in 009 News.
Depending on how practical this is, it does seem like it might be quite a good avenue to explore. The motorised wagons would, for my purposes, remove the issue of coupling as they'd never have to be coupled to anything, while the motorised chassis would likely not be free-rolling so would hopefully avoid the issue of rolling off the transporters at the wrong time. I realise it would potentially introduce other complications but I'd still be interested to see a bit more about how others have used this method.
Edit: I've found it - February 2016, pp.3-6 and it's part of Alan Gee's Hulme End articles. I shall have a read. The other thing that is noticeable is the design of the transporters, which have the standard gauge rails higher than the prototype to avoid the gauge and back to back issues but presumably still work - is this a viable option? I would have thought they might become a bit top-heavy once loaded.
As I remember it, the L&M the transporters initially carried the SG stock fairly low so as to allow full height SG stock to be carried without having an enormously high loading gauge (just a very high one!).
When the six wheel tank wagons were introduced the gubbins hanging underneath the tank did not clear the ridge in the middle of the transporter wagon so a modification was made which involved a hinged flange that could be moved over the fixed rail to raise the rail height for the tank wagons. So later photos will show a different height for the tank wagons than early ones.
Not suggesting you model the hinged part, but you can choose which version, high or low, to model.
Frank
Quote from: Frank on June 28, 2022, 08:28
As I remember it, the L&M the transporters initially carried the SG stock fairly low so as to allow full height SG stock to be carried without having an enormously high loading gauge (just a very high one!).
When the six wheel tank wagons were introduced the gubbins hanging underneath the tank did not clear the ridge in the middle of the transporter wagon so a modification was made which involved a hinged flange that could be moved over the fixed rail to raise the rail height for the tank wagons. So later photos will show a different height for the tank wagons than early ones.
Not suggesting you model the hinged part, but you can choose which version, high or low, to model.
Frank
In Alan Gee's Hulme End article from 2016, it suggests that Alan's initial design of transporter (outside bearings, standard gauge riding higher than the prototype) didn't work as it was too top-heavy, so a new version was created (closer to the prototype, inside bearings and lower centre of mass, but still slightly different as the standard gauge track is narrower than scale if using 00 gauge). I am not too bothered about exactly replicating the L&M design, but I had been under the impression that anything close to it is very difficult to do in 4mm scale if 16.5mm gauge is used for the standard gauge.
Depending on how practical this is, it does seem like it might be quite a good avenue to explore. The motorised wagons would, for my purposes, remove the issue of coupling as they'd never have to be coupled to anything, while the motorised chassis would likely not be free-rolling so would hopefully avoid the issue of rolling off the transporters at the wrong time. I realise it would potentially introduce other complications but I'd still be interested to see a bit more about how others have used this method. (//http://)
My suggestion would be to look into Nigel Lawton's belt drive systems - Here is what I have in mind (http://www.clag.org.uk/axle-hung.html) for a 'traction motor' set up rather than the more usual model railway set up. It looks like it should be possible to have the motor above the axle so the 'back to back' would be clear for the 'spine' of the transporter wagon, but still low enough to clear the floor of an SG open wagon.
Having the SG as OO or one of its wider (EM, P4) variants is going to be a bit dependant on where the loaded transporter wagon is going to be running. Certainly the rtr HO scale versions seem to work using 16.5mm on the upper part, but I would not expect them to get around 9" radius curves! The main limiting factor will be the 009 curves you want the transporter to go around, as the sharper the curve the more 'swing' the bogie will need within the 'spine' and the wider that will need to be. Uning (or making) an 'inside frame' bogie for the NG will give you more room, as will making P4 on the top, but if you are using wide curves(or none at all!) then you might get away with 16.5mm on top.
Quote from: JulienW on June 28, 2022, 12:10
Certainly the rtr HO scale versions seem to work using 16.5mm on the upper part, but I would not expect them to get around 9" radius curves! The main limiting factor will be the 009 curves you want the transporter to go around, as the sharper the curve the more 'swing' the bogie will need within the 'spine' and the wider that will need to be. Uning (or making) an 'inside frame' bogie for the NG will give you more room, as will making P4 on the top, but if you are using wide curves(or none at all!) then you might get away with 16.5mm on top.
I thought the RTR ones get away with using 16.5mm on top because they are a different design, whereas the L&M design has a 'spine' in the middle that comes above the height of the standard gauge rails. It's supposed to be for a micro layout, but a shunting layout with mostly straight track so I don't need them to be able to run on 9" radius curves, or even at particularly high speeds.
On a related subject, can anyone confirm whether the Leek & Manifold ever carried standard gauge van wagons on its transporters (as opposed to milk tanks and opens, which are a bit lower). I'm deciding whether to possibly ban van wagons from the layout I'm building to keep the loading gauge to a more manageable and not implausibly tall maximum height, but am unsure how this fits in with the prototype. I've seen some photos that possibly show a van wagon, but I can't be absolutely sure and other ones generally show opens or tanks.
Yes, vans were carried, see photo on p307 of Robert Gratton's book "The Leek & Manifold Valley Light Railway". Photo shows a GWR Mink A van on a transporter at Hulme End Station, so vans and various open wagons were carried on transporter wagons the full length of the line, whereas the milk tankers would not have been carried beyond Ecton.
Garry
Quote from: danny on October 02, 2022, 17:03
On a related subject, can anyone confirm whether the Leek & Manifold ever carried standard gauge van wagons on its transporters (as opposed to milk tanks and opens, which are a bit lower). I'm deciding whether to possibly ban van wagons from the layout I'm building to keep the loading gauge to a more manageable and not implausibly tall maximum height, but am unsure how this fits in with the prototype. I've seen some photos that possibly show a van wagon, but I can't be absolutely sure and other ones generally show opens or tanks.
Yes standard gauge vans were carried on the L&M. The height required was taller than that of a standard gauge line!!
I think it is 15' 3" above rail level on the L&M. That is about 60mm in 00 scale, plus the height of the rail and plastic track webbing you are probably looking at about 63-65mm from board/trackbed level.
See this link to google street view of one end of Swainsley Tunnel, that you can now drive through.
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.1166826,-1.8655942,3a,75y,201.13h,84.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBhmVCVuWR0yEOdonJfY10A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US
Quote from: B.Meldon on October 03, 2022, 09:50
Quote from: danny on October 02, 2022, 17:03
On a related subject, can anyone confirm whether the Leek & Manifold ever carried standard gauge van wagons on its transporters (as opposed to milk tanks and opens, which are a bit lower). I'm deciding whether to possibly ban van wagons from the layout I'm building to keep the loading gauge to a more manageable and not implausibly tall maximum height, but am unsure how this fits in with the prototype. I've seen some photos that possibly show a van wagon, but I can't be absolutely sure and other ones generally show opens or tanks.
Yes standard gauge vans were carried on the L&M. The height required was taller than that of a standard gauge line!!
I think it is 15' 3" above rail level on the L&M. That is about 50mm in 00 scale, plus the height of the rail and plastic track webbing you are probably looking at about 53-55mm from board/trackbed level.
See this link to google street view of one end of Swainsley Tunnel, that you can now drive through.
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.1166826,-1.8655942,3a,75y,201.13h,84.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBhmVCVuWR0yEOdonJfY10A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en-US
Isn't it 61mm? And with the track underneath plus a bit of clearance that's potentially going to take it up to 70 or 80mm...
Quote from: danny on October 03, 2022, 12:15
Isn't it 61mm?
Yes!! Sorry about that. I have modified my post now!!
A slightly different but related question - I can't remember reading about it anywhere and there don't seem to be many photos, but did the Leek & Manifold have any livestock traffic? In a way it's related to my original question, as I find it a bit unlikely that they would have used cattle wagons loaded onto transporters (because cattle can walk between standard and narrow gauge wagons so the time and money saved during transshipment isn't as significant). On the other hand I don't think they had a cattle wagon - they did have bogie flats and a covered van though, in addition to the transporters, and there were cattle in the area, hence the milk traffic carried on the line. I'm wondering if, on my freelance layout, I either need to represent livestock traffic in some way or be able to plausibly explain why it isn't represented, alongside the general goods traffic carried on the transporters.
At a guess they may well have used an NG van with the doors wedged open a crack. Iirc the vans had vents in the end as well.
It's something the Irish NG lines did (carrying livestock in 'ordinary' vans with the doors wedged to be open for ventilation but not so the animals could get out)
Quote from: JulienW on October 30, 2023, 08:56
At a guess they may well have used an NG van with the doors wedged open a crack. Iirc the vans had vents in the end as well.
It's something the Irish NG lines did (carrying livestock in 'ordinary' vans with the doors wedged to be open for ventilation but not so the animals could get out)
Would that suggest though that it wasn't frequent enough to need specific vehicles? Didn't they only have one NG van anyway?
Quote from: danny on October 30, 2023, 10:08
Would that suggest though that it wasn't frequent enough to need specific vehicles? Didn't they only have one NG van anyway?
That is what the big book says. One van, number 3 in their roster.
Quote from: danny on October 30, 2023, 10:08
Quote from: JulienW on October 30, 2023, 08:56
At a guess they may well have used an NG van with the doors wedged open a crack. Iirc the vans had vents in the end as well.
It's something the Irish NG lines did (carrying livestock in 'ordinary' vans with the doors wedged to be open for ventilation but not so the animals could get out)
Would that suggest though that it wasn't frequent enough to need specific vehicles? Didn't they only have one NG van anyway?
I also wonder that given the relatively short distances involved any cattle arriving or departing the Manifold Valley by rail would have done so from the standard gauge, getting to or from there on foot.
Quote from: JulienW on October 31, 2023, 08:56
Quote from: danny on October 30, 2023, 10:08
Quote from: JulienW on October 30, 2023, 08:56
At a guess they may well have used an NG van with the doors wedged open a crack. Iirc the vans had vents in the end as well.
It's something the Irish NG lines did (carrying livestock in 'ordinary' vans with the doors wedged to be open for ventilation but not so the animals could get out)
Would that suggest though that it wasn't frequent enough to need specific vehicles? Didn't they only have one NG van anyway?
I also wonder that given the relatively short distances involved any cattle arriving or departing the Manifold Valley by rail would have done so from the standard gauge, getting to or from there on foot.
I wondered that as well, although the line was over 8 miles long. Though obviously I don't know if they would generally have needed to travel over the whole line. I still think using standard gauge cattle wagons on the transporters seems a bit unlikely (and I don't think I've seen pictures of them, only normal vans, opens and tank wagons).
You might like to see this on you tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyrKbpIdDwk which is my take on a transporter wagon. The standard gauge wagon is built to 18.83mm gauge using a 'High Level kit' fly shunter chassis [appears not available at the moment. This is a test track which worked perfectly but once fitted on the layout didn't work properly. the transporter wagon is drawn from plans in the book on the L&M by Robert Gratton but using inside frame bogies to allow greater rotation of the bogie
Quote from: Crichworkshop2000 on December 07, 2023, 21:54You might like to see this on you tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyrKbpIdDwk which is my take on a transporter wagon. The standard gauge wagon is built to 18.83mm gauge using a 'High Level kit' fly shunter chassis [appears not available at the moment. This is a test track which worked perfectly but once fitted on the layout didn't work properly. the transporter wagon is drawn from plans in the book on the L&M by Robert Gratton but using inside frame bogies to allow greater rotation of the bogie
Yes, that's largely the system I'm using, only with bogies from Locos n Stuff to motorise the wagons. Can I ask what it was about it that didn't work on the actual layout? The only difference on mine is the use of overhead wire locos, allowing the transporter to receive power for the standard gauge wagon through the NG running rails.
On a related note, I'm wondering whether it's realistic for me to have a fan of two or three sidings where only one of them has a standard gauge section at the end. Continental lines with lots of transporters available seemed to keep them on the transporters for loading/unloading, but normal L&M practice seems to have been to unload the wagon onto the standard gauge track, and therefore required all such sidings (other than the creamery where tank wagons were loaded on the transporters) to have standard gauge sections at the end.