spikey Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Can anybody please tell me what the effective radius of operation is i.e. the distance from the base of the upright to a vertical down from the hook? And what sort of a safe working load would the prototype of that crane have had? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastglosmog Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Looking at the website picture, the angle of the jib to the horizontal is about 40º, so with a jib length given as 148.5mm, the radius of operation would be some 114mm. It looks a light crane and long jib, so I doubt it would be capable of lifting more than 2t safely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted October 10, 2017 Author Share Posted October 10, 2017 Thank you for that! Hmmm. I'm really after a steam-era yard crane in 00 which would look plausible when threatening to lift a BD container. Anybody know if there is such a thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 What about Ratio 531? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastglosmog Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) You could try the Mikes Models medium or heavy yard cranes, see http://www.holtmodelrailways.com/search.php for GWR or Midland/LMS types, or for a GWR 10t crane, you could get the Cambrian Models GWR crane wagon and ditch the wagon part. Edited October 10, 2017 by eastglosmog 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted October 10, 2017 Author Share Posted October 10, 2017 Thank you, gentlemen. I do believe I'm now sorted ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonhall Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 With a fixed crane you are not (or a lot less) reliant on having a counterweight, so a surprisingly flimsy crane can support quite a reasonable load - I there is a really large iron casting underground that does the same function as tree roots. This example at the MRC Butterley its'nt planted and shows it quite well - this example is 5t - alas to take the same photos this year pe prepared to take a machete with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonhall Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Thank you for that! Hmmm. I'm really after a steam-era yard crane in 00 which would look plausible when threatening to lift a BD container. Anybody know if there is such a thing? Without knowing the detail of the prototype it wouldn't surprise me if a BD was within its capability a couple of similar cranes just about squeeze into frames on this thread, a crane that can't lift the 'traffic of the district' isn't really much use! http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64948-traditional-container-traffic-photos-from-the-nrm/page-1 Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastglosmog Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 With a fixed crane you are not (or a lot less) reliant on having a counterweight, so a surprisingly flimsy crane can support quite a reasonable load - I there is a really large iron casting underground that does the same function as tree roots. This example at the MRC Butterley its'nt planted and shows it quite well - this example is 5t - alas to take the same photos this year pe prepared to take a machete with you. yardcrane001.jpg yardcrane002.jpg yardcrane003.jpg I think that is a Midland Heavy yard crane, considerably stouter and with shorter jib than the Peco offering. Lift radius makes a very big difference to crane lifting capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastglosmog Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 Without knowing the detail of the prototype it wouldn't surprise me if a BD was within its capability a couple of similar cranes just about squeeze into frames on this thread, a crane that can't lift the 'traffic of the district' isn't really much use! http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64948-traditional-container-traffic-photos-from-the-nrm/page-1 Jon Jon Just looked it up, and according to Midland Wagons Vol 2, Gross weight of a BD container is 5.8t (Tare 1.8t, 4t Payload), so even the Midland Heavy crane might be in trouble if having to deal with a fully laden BD! Its surprising how weak and feeble a lot of railway yard cranes were! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spikey Posted October 10, 2017 Author Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) Without knowing the detail of the prototype it wouldn't surprise me if a BD was within its capability a couple of similar cranes just about squeeze into frames on this thread, a crane that can't lift the 'traffic of the district' isn't really much use! http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/64948-traditional-container-traffic-photos-from-the-nrm/page-1 Jon Thanks for posting that, Jon. The crane in the second photo in post 10 of that thread does indeed look very much like Mike's Models' Midland Heavy Yard Crane, which is good because that's what I ordered half an hour ago. I love the way they've had to use the shortest chains possible on the container and wind it up hard against the jib to get a foot or so clearance over the wagon ... Edited October 10, 2017 by spikey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted October 11, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 11, 2017 Thanks for posting that, Jon. The crane in the second photo in post 10 of that thread does indeed look very much like Mike's Models' Midland Heavy Yard Crane, which is good because that's what I ordered half an hour ago. I love the way they've had to use the shortest chains possible on the container and wind it up hard against the jib to get a foot or so clearance over the wagon ... Which is why 3 plank wagons were marked with 'not to be loaded with containers', at least LMS ones were. I wonder how many loads got sent back to another goods shed to transfer the load to a more suitable vehicle? Must be a reason for the requirement of such labelling! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Which is why 3 plank wagons were marked with 'not to be loaded with containers', at least LMS ones were. I wonder how many loads got sent back to another goods shed to transfer the load to a more suitable vehicle? Must be a reason for the requirement of such labelling! Post #11 shows containers loaded on 3 plank wagons, which were usually dropside anyway. There were 2 GWR 3 plank wagons built for container traffic. These had a door in fixed sides. Perhaps the above explains why there were only two! Peco portrayed this wagon in their 'Wonderful Wagon' range (not very well IMHO) and fictitious examples in the other three liveries. There was also a BR version, but I don't know if it was numbered as a Western Region wagon. I can recall seeing a container loaded in a 5 plank wagon.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastglosmog Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Which is why 3 plank wagons were marked with 'not to be loaded with containers', at least LMS ones were. I wonder how many loads got sent back to another goods shed to transfer the load to a more suitable vehicle? Must be a reason for the requirement of such labelling! I wonder how often that was disobeyed, or was it only for fixed side 3 plank wagons? Top right cover photo of LMS Wagons Vol 2 has a type A container in a 3 plank LMS dropside wagon (and a substantial crane).............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now