Jump to content
 

Rollwagen/transporter wagons


009 micro modeller
 Share

Recommended Posts

Looking at pictures of these wagons, as used in Continental Europe and occasionally elsewhere to carry standard gauge wagons over narrow gauge lines, I’m a bit confused about some basic aspects of the design, particularly looking at this wagon (photo link from Wikipedia):

 

001015_gauge_buster.jpg

 

The design used on British (or British-influenced) lines (photo link from Flickr below) seems to have the spine/hump in the middle, which can be annoying when trying to model them but which I thought was necessary to house the narrow gauge wheels and allow the standard gauge wagon to sit closer to the ground. However, the Continental designs appear not to have this ‘hump’ and the standard gauge wagon seems higher with respect to the narrow gauge wheels. Is there a reason why they don’t have/don’t need the hump, and does it make the centre of mass higher in any way? I realise the way in which they are loaded and unloaded is quite different, but I wouldn’t have thought that was relevant to the basic structure of the wagon and how close to the ground everything has to be.

 

staffs - lms wagon on leek & manifold transporter at hulme end c1930

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Looking at pictures of these wagons, as used in Continental Europe and occasionally elsewhere to carry standard gauge wagons over narrow gauge lines, I’m a bit confused about some basic aspects of the design, particularly looking at this wagon (photo link from Wikipedia):

 

001015_gauge_buster.jpg

 

The design used on British (or British-influenced) lines (photo link from Flickr below) seems to have the spine/hump in the middle, which can be annoying when trying to model them but which I thought was necessary to house the narrow gauge wheels and allow the standard gauge wagon to sit closer to the ground. However, the Continental designs appear not to have this ‘hump’ and the standard gauge wagon seems higher with respect to the narrow gauge wheels. Is there a reason why they don’t have/don’t need the hump, and does it make the centre of mass higher in any way? I realise the way in which they are loaded and unloaded is quite different, but I wouldn’t have thought that was relevant to the basic structure of the wagon and how close to the ground everything has to be.

 

staffs - lms wagon on leek & manifold transporter at hulme end c1930

 

 

Tiny wheels on the Continent.

 

CJI.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jonhall said:

its probably due to loading gauge restrictions on the Leek&Manifold that weren't present on the continental systems 

 

Jon


I thought they had quite a large loading gauge though. But I could be wrong.

 

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Tiny wheels on the Continent.

 

CJI.


How tiny are we talking, roughly? I don’t know about the prototype but my 009 ones (loosely L&M-based) are designed to use 6.2mm diameter wheels (about a scale 19”), and from memory the RTR H0e (Continental design) one I have somewhere doesn’t have particularly small wheels (and they don’t look like they’re hugely overscale diameter). I’ll have to get it out again and have a look at it. I think it also has 12 wheels on 2 bogies but ans I recall not all of the prototype ones had this many.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:


I thought they had quite a large loading gauge though. But I could be wrong.

 


How tiny are we talking, roughly? I don’t know about the prototype but my 009 ones (loosely L&M-based) are designed to use 6.2mm diameter wheels (about a scale 19”), and from memory the RTR H0e (Continental design) one I have somewhere doesn’t have particularly small wheels (and they don’t look like they’re hugely overscale diameter). I’ll have to get it out again and have a look at it. I think it also has 12 wheels on 2 bogies but ans I recall not all of the prototype ones had this many.

 

I have, somewhere, Rollbock - and the wheels are miniscule.

 

I am sure that there will be a diagram or drawing somewhere on one of the Continental NG websites.

 

CJI.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:


Rollbocks are a different thing though aren’t they? I was thinking of the fixed, roll on roll off type of transporter wagons, whereas aren’t rollbocks the bogies that pick up individual axles of the standard gauge wagons?

 

Correct - but my recollection of Continental transporter wagons (Rollwagen?), seen on YouTube, is that the wagon bogies (6-wheeled?) had similar, tiny wheels to the transporter bogies.

 

CJI.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

you also need to consider the gauge of the narrow gauge - the L&M was  2 ft 6 in (762 mm) but I'd guess the continental wagon you have shown as an example is probably meter gauge, so there is a bit more room on the L&M wagon to get the frames between the standard gauge wheelsets, which would allow the carried wagon to sit a bit lower.

 

I think that the ONLY example of British transporter wagons was the L&M, and therefore you are only talking about 5-6 wagons total.

 

Jon

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Correct - but my recollection of Continental transporter wagons (Rollwagen?), seen on YouTube, is that the wagon bogies (6-wheeled?) had similar, tiny wheels to the transporter bogies.

 

CJI.


I haven’t managed to find any drawings yet - are they extremely small (under 30cm/12” or so)? Interestingly, I did find a reference to Leek & Manifold transporter wagons having 21” diameter wheels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jonhall said:

you also need to consider the gauge of the narrow gauge - the L&M was  2 ft 6 in (762 mm) but I'd guess the continental wagon you have shown as an example is probably meter gauge, so there is a bit more room on the L&M wagon to get the frames between the standard gauge wheelsets, which would allow the carried wagon to sit a bit lower.

 

I think that the ONLY example of British transporter wagons was the L&M, and therefore you are only talking about 5-6 wagons total.

 

Jon


Several Continental lines that use them are 75 or 76cm gauge (2’ 6”, give or take) so I’m not sure it’s that. Off the top of my head, all the other British examples (Padarn, LNWR and GWR carrying Ffestiniog wagons, Dorking Greystone internal system etc.) involved narrower gauge wagons being carried on a wider gauge, so not the same thing. Did the Barsi Light Railway in India (designed by Calthrop) use them?

 

For modelling purposes, I’m now considering using a freelance design that is a sort of compromise between the Continental and L&M designs, as the hump/spine is causing some clearance issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
43 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:


I haven’t managed to find any drawings yet - are they extremely small (under 30cm/12” or so)? Interestingly, I did find a reference to Leek & Manifold transporter wagons having 21” diameter wheels.

 

Do a Wikipedia search on Rollbock - there is a picture there that will give you an idea of the wheel diameter in question.

 

CJI.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:


Several Continental lines that use them are 75 or 76cm gauge (2’ 6”, give or take) so I’m not sure it’s that.

 

This shows the 760mm transporter wagons at Oshatz, which I think has quite a similarity with the L&M. http://www.tuff-tuff-eisenbahn.de/oschatz/oschatz10.htm

 

Alas I'm away from my own photos of German transporter wagons.

 

Jon

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jonhall said:

 

This shows the 760mm transporter wagons at Oshatz, which I think has quite a similarity with the L&M. http://www.tuff-tuff-eisenbahn.de/oschatz/oschatz10.htm

 

Alas I'm away from my own photos of German transporter wagons.

 

Jon


It still doesn’t quite have the same very tall, fully enclosed ‘hump’, and the SG rails look slightly higher relative to the wheels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ian Morgan said:

Some photos I took on the Zillertalbahn, but still not showing the wheels clearly:

DSC01174.JPG.683496ff5278c22ab026b8d78c8ec38e.JPGDSC01173.JPG.7acd450d98d5bdb6edb7cf43772bc62e.JPGDSC01176.JPG.3b6323286999b10944a200e1e858a593.JPGimage.png.694f0c53669762a8737a8ff5696eba5e.pngimage.png.ae2039b1d6aeea40d3f3aa223793fe6c.png

 

Great photos, thanks for posting them.

 

Does anyone know of a source of HOe Austrian Rollwagen?  Either Zillertalbahn or OBB would be fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These two shots show a couple of differences between German transporter wagons - by way of demonstrating that there are differences in design.

 

This seems quite a common layout - the standard gauge wheel is sitting on an inner rail a little below the mainframes of the transporter wagon, which is deeper allowing all the bogies and brake gear to sit more or less below the top edge of the frames.

 

 

1904120123.JPG

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

but its neighbour has a different frame arrangement - the frame is lower, and the standard gauge wheelset is sitting above it, so that the bogies (with almost identical diameter wheels)  and the brake equipment all stick up above the frames.

 

(both at Zittau)

 

1904120124.JPG

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...