Cranes Are For Lifting Heavy Things Like Sleepers and Rails

[844fan]

Hey all,

I just recently realized that for one of my railway projects the lone track maintenance loco would be horribly inadequate on it's own the loco in question is a slightly modified S&M No. 1 Gazelle Track inspector loco. Mods are raised buffers so it can push or pull standard stock within it's tractive effort.

 

I know she can pull a small coach and I would assume also she could haul a conflat or small wagon or two behind her but flatbeds full of sleepers or rails not a chance. So I've decided to add a crane tank to the roster for such duties. Question is what one?

 

I'm not too versed in CTs as I only know of the Andrew Barclay engines sold to Stanton Iron Works, Dubs of Glasgow built Dubsy (or if you like the character Harvy) the GWR "Hercules" Pannier and the outright goofy looking GER (I think) "Funnel Cranes" which I personally find to be simply dopey and I'd rather not use them (Funnel crane Tanks that is).

 

So yeah were there other crane tanks out there? They are quite interesting industrial locos and all though I find it funny only besides Hercules most CTs were 0-4-0s you'd think that a 0-6-0 wheel set would be suited to it better since it'd be far more stable on it's wheels.

 

Anyway thank you in advance for any help. Take care.

[Gordon A]

What sort of setting are your crane ranks going to be working in?

For PWay work you definitely need a self propelled crane. A crane tank would be a waste of space.

 

The draw back of crane tanks is the limited reach due to short jibs and limited lifting capability - I would say one to two tons.

 

Most rail mounted cranes are self propelled and can be used to shunt wagons ie 5 ton Smith Rodley.

The jibs are generally longer and close in have a greater lifting capacity.

 

The advantage of mounting the crane around the chimney is you have a 180 degree arc with only the buffers at the front getting in the way if moving a load from one side to the other.

 

Gordon A

[Steamport Southport]

I think most of the crane tanks were used in steelworks and shipyards for lifting things like castings which were too heavy for the men to lift. The capacity wasn't that great about 5 tons maximum.

 

Anything more than that and they would use a proper crane. Some hand cranes could lift much more than that. That's before you get to the massive steam or diesel power cranes that could lift 100 tons.

 

 

Here's a bit of film of one.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5in-ZUFFiUw

 

 

 

Jason

[10000]

I think most of the crane tanks were used in steelworks and shipyards for lifting things like castings which were too heavy for the men to lift. The capacity wasn't that great about 5 tons maximum.

 

Anything more than that and they would use a proper crane. Some hand cranes could lift much more than that. That's before you get to the massive steam or diesel power cranes that could lift 100 tons.

 

 

Here's a bit of film of one.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5in-ZUFFiUw

 

 

 

Jason

 

Nice to see  the Dubs in operation. By the time I started work at Shelton Iron & Steel in 1968 it was out of service.

[The Johnster]

Check out the Newlands Sidings thread a few lines up.  Not, I suspect what you are looking for as mention of 'Gazelle' suggests something on a smaller scale altogether, but good background and it'll give you some ideas.

[Londontram]

Many years ago (early 1980s) I had the chance to rid on the footplate of the Stanton iron works crane tank while still steamable at the Midland railway center and a great little loco she was.

 

I guess one big advantage of a crane tank is that if it de rails it can lift its self back on again

 

                                                   Steve

[eastglosmog]

The LNWR had three 0-4-2t crane tanks, designated "Crane Shunters" (see Edward Talbot's book on LNWR Engines), built 1892 with 4t cranes.  two at least were later fitted with a longer jib and downrated to 3t lift capacity.  They lasted well in to LMS days.  I am no sure whether they were deployed anywhere other than Crewe works - the only pictures of them I have seen is shunting and lifting things around Crewe.

[Steamport Southport]

I was also trying to find footage of the Doxford Crane Tanks at work. I've see some before, but couldn't find any on YouTube.

 

Now they are cute.

 

http://railwayherald.com/imagingcentre/view/263205/RD

 

 

Jason

[The Johnster]

Many years ago (early 1980s) I had the chance to rid on the footplate of the Stanton iron works crane tank while still steamable at the Midland railway center and a great little loco she was.

 

I guess one big advantage of a crane tank is that if it de rails it can lift its self back on again

 

                                                   Steve

 

No, you need a skyhook for that, but the crane tank can lift the skyhook into position.

[844fan]

What sort of setting are your crane ranks going to be working in?

For PWay work you definitely need a self propelled crane. A crane tank would be a waste of space.

 

The draw back of crane tanks is the limited reach due to short jibs and limited lifting capability - I would say one to two tons.

 

Most rail mounted cranes are self propelled and can be used to shunt wagons ie 5 ton Smith Rodley.

The jibs are generally longer and close in have a greater lifting capacity.

 

The advantage of mounting the crane around the chimney is you have a 180 degree arc with only the buffers at the front getting in the way if moving a load from one side to the other.

 

Gordon A

Well my setting is a mainline affair and the small Gazelle like loco is doing the same thing it's prototype did for the WD as a track inspection vehicle. The crane tank in this case would be there for maintenance of the track and sleepers where a crane on it's own would be overkill. Small sections of line at a time would be well worth the use and I'm sure that most crane tanks could lift a couple rails and sleepers with no problem. There would be rail cranes for anything beyond the Tank engine.

 

As for the Jib problem it's one of the reasons I don't want to use Dubsy (I like the engine just not for this kind of work) or the Funnel tanks since they have a fixed radius the Stanton Crane Tanks had a Jib that could raise and lower allowing for more distance and a better radius.

 

The LNWR had three 0-4-2t crane tanks, designated "Crane Shunters" (see Edward Talbot's book on LNWR Engines), built 1892 with 4t cranes.  two at least were later fitted with a longer jib and downrated to 3t lift capacity.  They lasted well in to LMS days.  I am no sure whether they were deployed anywhere other than Crewe works - the only pictures of them I have seen is shunting and lifting things around Crewe.

Those remind me alot of Hercules actually. Also they are the earliest example I've seen so far since the Stanton engines were from the 20s.

 

I was also trying to find footage of the Doxford Crane Tanks at work. I've see some before, but couldn't find any on YouTube.

 

Now they are cute.

 

http://railwayherald.com/imagingcentre/view/263205/RD

 

 

Jason

They are Andrew Barclay built too like the Stanton engines if I'm not mistaken. They are quite nice though I like their cousins a tiny bit more with the way they have tanks and the crane's flywheel just looks neat to me.

[Gordon A]

Given their short reach crane tanks may be able to load sleepers into wagons, but for lifting track I would say definitely not.

Imagine your crane tank handling a 40ft or 60foot length of rail - what can it do with it and how?

As far as I am aware in the UK all railway company track maintenance was done with specifically designed p.way or engineers cranes.

 

Having driven a Smith Rodley 5 ton steam crane on a preserved line loading and laying 40 and 60 foot lengths of rail as well as sleepers and point work components a crane tank would not be capable of doing the job, where as the crane on the right chassis is also capable of moving two or three wagons around as well as loading.

 

Crane tanks were generally used like early fork lift trucks.

 

If you draw a scale plan of your chosen crane tank and the arc of the jib, then set it on a track with a parallel track each side you will see what I am getting at.

 

If you change your setting to that of a factory or production site then you would have a more believable setting for your crane tank.

 

Gordon A

[844fan]

Given their short reach crane tanks may be able to load sleepers into wagons, but for lifting track I would say definitely not.

Imagine your crane tank handling a 40ft or 60foot length of rail - what can it do with it and how?

As far as I am aware in the UK all railway company track maintenance was done with specifically designed p.way or engineers cranes.

 

Having driven a Smith Rodley 5 ton steam crane on a preserved line loading and laying 40 and 60 foot lengths of rail as well as sleepers and point work components a crane tank would not be capable of doing the job, where as the crane on the right chassis is also capable of moving two or three wagons around as well as loading.

 

Crane tanks were generally used like early fork lift trucks.

 

If you draw a scale plan of your chosen crane tank and the arc of the jib, then set it on a track with a parallel track each side you will see what I am getting at.

 

If you change your setting to that of a factory or production site then you would have a more believable setting for your crane tank.

 

Gordon A

I am sure PW can and in my case will use crane tanks for smaller tasks that involve track maintenance. But your right a crane tank is not going to be sufficient on it's own but I think I've found a good candidate for the heavy lifter https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/keyword/773044/ Now I'd classify this as a locomotive wrecker (Read Railway Tow Truck) in nature which I mean it's a locomotive capable of pulling trains for repairs and other duties such as rerailing another engine.

 

It's Jib is definitely of good range and I'm quite sure it can outdo any of the crane tanks. That said my primary three Permanent Way Locos are The inspection and minor repair Gazelle like engine, A Barclay "Stanton" crane tank for line clearing and medium repairs, and a Sentinel Ash Crane loco for all other types of repair needed for the lines. Three locos each with a purpose and more.

 

I do hope I'm not sounding stubborn on the crane tank thing but I really want one for my roster. I think I found a acceptable compromise here though.

[Gordon A]

The Ash Crane is designed just for that. All the load weight plus that of the crane mechanism is taken on one axle so will be very limited.

Also looking at the design of your subject the travel of the crane is controlled from the cab of the loco, not from the crane. Very inefficient. You either employ two persons as a crew one for the crane and one for the "loco", or the crane driver does the lift, hops down, moves the unit, then climbs back up to the crane. Communication between the two crew members would be very impractical. I would go so far as saying this is dangerous.

In p.way work there is a lot of travelling with the load suspended. On a conventional crane the driver controls all travel and lifting gear from one place and can make adjustments while moving so that the load avoids obstacles.

P.way cranes have the capability to safely travel with a suspended load while "free on rails" ie no stabilisers or rail clamps deployed. 

Cranes are like any other piece of machinery in that they are designed to do a job in specified environments. The crane tanks and ash cranes have too many limitations to be used in p.way work or yards.

Put yourself in a p.way yard managers shoes, would you rather have a conventional p.way crane with a good reach which means you can stack sleepers and other materials further away from the siding, or a crane tank that can only reach across to the next track? 

Look up "permanent way cranes" on the internet. I have never heard of or seen pictures of crane tanks of any sort working in a p.way yard in the UK.

 

Gordon A

[844fan]

The Ash Crane is designed just for that. All the load weight plus that of the crane mechanism is taken on one axle so will be very limited.

Also looking at the design of your subject the travel of the crane is controlled from the cab of the loco, not from the crane. Very inefficient. You either employ two persons as a crew one for the crane and one for the "loco", or the crane driver does the lift, hops down, moves the unit, then climbs back up to the crane. Communication between the two crew members would be very impractical. I would go so far as saying this is dangerous.

In p.way work there is a lot of travelling with the load suspended. On a conventional crane the driver controls all travel and lifting gear from one place and can make adjustments while moving so that the load avoids obstacles.

P.way cranes have the capability to safely travel with a suspended load while "free on rails" ie no stabilisers or rail clamps deployed. 

Cranes are like any other piece of machinery in that they are designed to do a job in specified environments. The crane tanks and ash cranes have too many limitations to be used in p.way work or yards.

Put yourself in a p.way yard managers shoes, would you rather have a conventional p.way crane with a good reach which means you can stack sleepers and other materials further away from the siding, or a crane tank that can only reach across to the next track? 

Look up "permanent way cranes" on the internet. I have never heard of or seen pictures of crane tanks of any sort working in a p.way yard in the UK.

 

Gordon A

Hmm the Ash Crane is more likely than you think for Permanent Way work than you think. I give you a American Permanent way crane https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/92/51/4f/92514fea98276861c239e87994b905a4.jpg Looks about the size of the Ash crane to me and beyond having bogies I think it can still work realisticly. As for the crane tank would having it for a goods yard to load and unload? Only in dire emergencies would a Crane Tank be PW.

[Gordon A]

The picture in your last post shows an American design wrecking (breakdown) crane.

You can see the crane is mounted on a bogie chassis.

I was under the impression that you were wanting to build a British p.way depot, so apologises if I have been misleading you..

 

This is a picture of the Nevada Northern Railway museum wrecking (breakdown) crane, very similar to the crane in your picture in the previous post.

I would estimate that the outer hook would be capable of lifting 5 to 7 tons, while the inner hook over 30 tons.

In the above picture you can see both sets of stabilisers extended.

 

Using a crane of this size in a p.way depot would be like using an articulated lorry to deliver a small parcel.

The UK had a plethora of crane builders so until the last ten years or so had no need to import any railway cranes.

Britain was the first country in the world to build a heavy lift (36 ton) steam accident crane at the beginning of the 20th century by Ransome & Rapier on a five axle chassis.

 

 

Gordon A

[844fan]

The picture in your last post shows an American design wrecking (breakdown) crane.

You can see the crane is mounted on a bogie chassis.

I was under the impression that you were wanting to build a British p.way depot, so apologises if I have been misleading you..

 

This is a picture of the Nevada Northern Railway museum wrecking (breakdown) crane, very similar to the crane in your picture in the previous post.

I would estimate that the outer hook would be capable of lifting 5 to 7 tons, while the inner hook over 30 tons.

In the above picture you can see both sets of stabilisers extended.

 

Using a crane of this size in a p.way depot would be like using an articulated lorry to deliver a small parcel.

The UK had a plethora of crane builders so until the last ten years or so had no need to import any railway cranes.

Britain was the first country in the world to build a heavy lift (36 ton) steam accident crane at the beginning of the 20th century by Ransome & Rapier on a five axle chassis.

 

 

Gordon A

No no you've been nothing but helpful my friend. If anything I'm making the mistakes if you can give examples of good PW cranes by all means I'm willing to listen I only wanted to try and work the Ash Crane and the Tanks into my PW service but if anything I am learning that may be impossible with the only engine I've had so far that can do PW work is Gazelle but that's only inspection and extremely light repairs (Like the tightening of nuts and bolts) since that kind of engine has been used principally as this in real life for the LMR. The Ash crane and Crane Tanks can be useful in the goods yards or for minor rerailing (Only one set of wheels off the track) so I'm sure I can find a home for them just not in the PW department.

[eastglosmog]

Hmm the Ash Crane is more likely than you think for Permanent Way work than you think. I give you a American Permanent way crane https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/92/51/4f/92514fea98276861c239e87994b905a4.jpg Looks about the size of the Ash crane to me and beyond having bogies I think it can still work realisticly. As for the crane tank would having it for a goods yard to load and unload? Only in dire emergencies would a Crane Tank be PW.

Just managed to find my copy of Edward Talbot's book on Crewe Works, which I had mislaid when writing my earlier reply (OK, it was under my nose, just couldn't see it).  Seems like there were actually 6 of the 0-4-2t crane tanks, not sure when they built the other three, but before 1915.  Their duties are described as shunting in various shops of Crewe works and the Steel works and general lifting in those shops and works, including castings and moldings. Of interest, though, to your query is a picture of No. 3246 unloading hydraulic equipment from a wagon behind it onto the platform in Crewe station (or maybe it was loading it into the wagon - can't tell for certain).

[Killian keane]

(please see post below)

Edited June 28, 2017 by Killian keane

[Killian keane]

If I could make a case in favour of a crane tank

I've always found those secr funnel crane engines rather attractive, but if thats not what youre into, ok, the north london railway had a very attractive 0-4-2st crane engine, p.s. it would be interesting to see your model of gazelle

Edited June 29, 2017 by Killian keane

[844fan]

If I could make a case in favour of a crane tank

I've always found those secr funnel crane engines rather attractive, but if thats not what youre into, ok, the north london railway had a very attractive 0-4-4st crane engine, p.s. it would be interesting to see your model of gazelle

Well your in for a surprise witm my model as it doesn't yet exist and will not for a while. Well at least not as a physical model as until I am able to move into a larger home I haven't even the room for a HO/OO railway. Till then I am going to broaden my skills in 3D rendering and code my models to run in Trainz Simulator. I've been busy with research and creating the drawings I'm to make into 3D so I've yet to get started on the technical side but I am making excellent progress with the drawn plans in TT scale which I'll be enlarging for the modeling.

 

As soon as I can I'll show off Gazelle and all my other locomotives. 4 of which are what if situations being of 1860s-90s American Locomotives rebuilt to run in the loading gauge of all regions. No you will not be seeing a Big Boy or a early american Mallet with buffers all my engines are around the size of a Black 5 at their largest (Sierra No.3 is the basis of the largest one and I did a comparison of two existing models a Black 5 and said engine and she was just as tall and wide so safe if given some alterations.) I do my research unlike Hit Entertainment. 

 

I follow a well known man's philosophy on railways as you can see in my signature below. But I'm also not a fool since I plan to make real models of these one day.

[jonhall]

I am sure PW can and in my case will use crane tanks for smaller tasks that involve track maintenance. But your right a crane tank is not going to be sufficient on it's own but I think I've found a good candidate for the heavy lifter https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/keyword/773044/ Now I'd classify this as a locomotive wrecker (Read Railway Tow Truck) in nature which I mean it's a locomotive capable of pulling trains for repairs and other duties such as rerailing another engine.

 

 

Based on the BR numbering of that crane, it was only 1.5t capacity.

 

Jon

[Killian keane]

Well your in for a surprise witm my model as it doesn't yet exist and will not for a while. Well at least not as a physical model as until I am able to move into a larger home I haven't even the room for a HO/OO railway. Till then I am going to broaden my skills in 3D rendering and code my models to run in Trainz Simulator. I've been busy with research and creating the drawings I'm to make into 3D so I've yet to get started on the technical side but I am making excellent progress with the drawn plans in TT scale which I'll be enlarging for the modeling.

 

As soon as I can I'll show off Gazelle and all my other locomotives. 4 of which are what if situations being of 1860s-90s American Locomotives rebuilt to run in the loading gauge of all regions. No you will not be seeing a Big Boy or a early american Mallet with buffers all my engines are around the size of a Black 5 at their largest (Sierra No.3 is the basis of the largest one and I did a comparison of two existing models a Black 5 and said engine and she was just as tall and wide so safe if given some alterations.) I do my research unlike Hit Entertainment. 

 

I follow a well known man's philosophy on railways as you can see in my signature below. But I'm also not a fool since I plan to make real models of these one day.

Oh goodness! I remember the mad bridgeman of Hampshire!

[Gordon A]

As I mentioned in post 13 use the internet for pictures of p.way cranes.

I can only think of one 00 kit that would be suitable which is the Booth Rodley crane made by Airfix / Dapol.

 

   

 

The kit built straight from the bag gives you a bogie chassis, which I understand was only used by industrial concerns.

The BR version ran on an 8 wheeled rigid chassis. There has been a couple of articles in the British model press covering changing the chassis usinf either a Flying Scotsman tender chassis or plasticard and tender axle box/spring castings.

 

Here is a picture of a BR  version with the correct chassis.

 

The picture is taken off the net from RMweb archive.

 

Search the Net under Dapol rail crane for more pictures.

 

The match truck can be built using modified wagon kits or rtr.

 

Gordon A

 

 

[The Johnster]

AFAIK the 15 ton Booth Rodley as modelled very cheaply and effectively by Airfix and later Dapol as a plastic construction kit is, as supplied on bogies, a mobile crane for internal user industrial customers, hauled by a locomotive and unable to move under it's own power.  The BR version, as stated, came with an 8-wheel rigid self propelled chassis, and I believe it could be supplied with a diesel electric or diesel hydraulic transmission.  The one I was familiar with was based at Radyr PD (Pre-assembled track Depot), and used around the yard for lifting and moving lengths of prefabricated track; it could then be hauled by a loco with the transmission isolated to a relaying site where it could be similarly used to move track sections into position after unloading them from flat bogie wagons, or to recover old lengths and load them on to the wagons.  Job completed, it could then be hauled back to Radyr.  Speed hauled by a loco was, IIRC, 35mph, and the crane was marshalled either directly behind the loco or directly behind the fitted head (explanation for 844, who is American and may need one, many British freight trains ran without any continuous brake from the loco, and were controlled partly by the guard in a brake van at the back.  If some 'fitted' wagons were provided and the vacuum brake connected to the loco, this was known as the fitted head).  The crane and it's associated vehicles, a match wagon to support the jib and a mess and tool van, were not vacuum braked.  Speed under the crane's own power must have been very low.

 

15 tons refers to the safe working load (SWL), the vehicle, again IIRC, weighed 35 tons.  The model shown in the photograph is in a later livery, and does not include the mess and tool van, in earlier days a converted GWR 'Toad' brake van.  Earlier livery was grey with black below the solebars; the match truck, um, matched.  This was a fairly typical crane for per way use, and the successor of various steam cranes of around the 10 ton upwards SWL sort.  It would not have been equipped for breakdown work.

 

Something of this sort is much more likely to be used in such work than a crane tank, which would be unable to move to a site easily and would in any case not have sufficient lifting capacity.

[Killian keane]

If you want to be really... outlandish you could model the first crane engine, built as early as 1817, though I can scarcely find but a syperficial description of the machine, so it would have to be based on conjecture