A rather unusual 'diamond' crossing...

[johndon]

In Australia:

 

 

[alastairq]

Peco? Anyone?

 

[Miss Prism]

They need some of those outside Tescos.

[njee20]

My son has a finescale model of this arrangement. 
 

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by njee20
Reducing image size

[Graham456]

15 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

They need some of those outside Tescos.

A ! What ?

tesco have some of those things down here in Somerset 

their called shopping trolleys!

 

if some one made a 4mm model it would have to etched brass  to do the sides and building that long rake of them would be FUN !

[RailWest]

I love the 'tail flag' !!

[Michael Hodgson]

34 minutes ago, RailWest said:

I love the 'tail flag' !!

I was about to say that but you beat me to it!

[Michael Hodgson]

A wrong side failure on that could be pretty disastrous for a train on the lower level.

I can't help think a conventional crossing on the level would have been cheaper and easier.

[bécasse]

There was (at least) one in the UK, installed during WWII at Northallerton, although the "crossing" angle and height difference differed from the one pictured.

[The Stationmaster]

Most QR locos are pretty substantial and the lifeguards might make quite a mess of the cane railway rails even before the rest of the loco hits them.  But the cane tracks do seem to engage quite firmly in the QR track so it might not be quite that simple.   Most of these crossing are on the electrified main line south of Rockhampton and are apparently used because a conventional diamond crossing would have restricted running speeds for QR's tilt trains.  

 

Mind you I reckon the deflector on a tilt train would be above rail level on a 2 ft gauge cane railway if this photo of mine is any guide  -

[russ p]

Is this like this because those wheels on the  BRUTE trolly esq wagons are so small and wouldn't take kindly to a wide flangeway?

[Michael Hodgson]

2 hours ago, bécasse said:

There was (at least) one in the UK, installed during WWII at Northallerton, although the "crossing" angle and height difference differed from the one pictured.

I remember seeing a crossing similar to this at Barry, taking the pier railway over the BR track.  However the pier railway's rails weren't  hinged and powered like that - they were lift/bolt on as required, and presumably hardly ever used.

[Joseph_Pestell]

4 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

A wrong side failure on that could be pretty disastrous for a train on the lower level.

I can't help think a conventional crossing on the level would have been cheaper and easier.

 

Yes, it would.

 

But not easy to mix gauges at pointwork. Above all, I think that those tiny wheels would derail on a conventional crossing.