7mm Heybridge Basin

[Richard Gawler]

Beware, successful rope shunting relies on electrically very short frog sections, or battery-powered traction. The Peco 'Unifrog' left unwired (dead frog) seems ideal for this, but a conventional hand-built crossing assembly 100+ mm long (as on my A6) will cause a short circuit when a track-powered loco is part way into the operation. This was one of the incentives to build 'Lady Marion' with battery power.

 

[Joe's Garage]

Again thanks Richard for the link I looked back at the spiked track. I should have used spikes on my "Another attempt" not soldered track to allow for movement in the rail.
On the idea of rope shunting Trevor Nunn set up a switch to allow the tram loco to run straight and set the point to enable the wagon to go behind the mill on his Wicken layout. It ran beautifully, I should know as I "played" with it at Imrex in the 80s! Always drew a crowd when doing this. Impeccable running was his locos.
Cheers Julian

 

[Richard Gawler]

On the idea of rope shunting Trevor Nunn set up a switch to allow the tram loco to run straight and set the point to enable the wagon to go behind the mill on his Wicken layout. It ran beautifully, I should know as I "played" with it at Imrex in the 80s!

I like it! All it needs is a double-pole changeover switch labelled "Run" and "Shunt" placed between the stock rails and the changover switch for the frog.


For Heybridge Basin I could have two such switches, one on the front of the layout and one on the back. The dual control effected is much like a domestic lighting circuit with three or more switches.

I wonder if a combined, "all in one" tiebar control is possible? Perhaps, a rotary switch. The two innermost positions would set the points. The two outermost positions would reverse the polarity to the crossing. Easy to do with a stall motor moving the tiebar, harder with a purely mechanical system.

Or perhaps a manual, non-latching push button labelled "shunt" to engage a relay to reverse the polarity of the crossing. This relay to be released the next time the point blades move.

 

[simond]

why do you need frog switching? Provided the "rope" is sufficiently longer than the frog & switchblades, I think it will work fine without.

The loco goes one way (frog switched appropriately) and clears the frog, and the blades are switched and the wagon goes the other way.

If the loco is RC or DC equipped with a KA, (or analog with a flywheel) then dead frogs are entirely possible. My pal, John's, layout is entirely dead frog outdoors. If you make your own, you can get down to ~ 40mm dead section which is less than 6' and most locos would manage that.

 

[Richard Gawler]

Provided the "rope" is sufficiently longer than the frog & switchblades, I think it will work fine without.

I agree entirely, but the rope will need to be 450 mm long to let the locomotive run clear of the frog before the wagon reaches the point blades. I think this would look excessive, but this is only my opinion.

If you make your own, you can get down to ~ 40mm dead section which is less than 6' and most locos would manage that.

Well, 'Blackwater' (MW class K) needs a dead section less than 35 mm long if she is to have four of her six wheels on live track.

The minimum length of rope needed to shunt either of the two sidings would depend on whether the loco should haul the wagon all the way to the end of the siding in one go. If so, about 300 mm would be enough but clearly this still needs frog switching for the A6. The water column would have to go too, to work the platform road.

I have done my test runs with a 140 mm rope. This has worked, using a battery loco and with the loco uncoupling from the rope and "running round" as it were to propel the wagon along the siding. Frog switching would let me use one of my analogue locos in its place.

I could of course try to build short dead frogs on the next layout

 

[Osgood]

Does anyone else have a view on how this rope shunting experiment at The Basin is likely to end up?

 

[simond]

I love the blokes standing looking at it. You can imagine their discussion.

 

[simond]

I agree entirely, but the rope will need to be 450 mm long to let the locomotive run clear of the frog before the wagon reaches the point blades. I think this would look excessive, but this is only my opinion.



Well, 'Blackwater' (MW class K) needs a dead section less than 35 mm long if she is to have four of her six wheels on live track.

The minimum length of rope needed to shunt either of the two sidings would depend on whether the loco should haul the wagon all the way to the end of the siding in one go. If so, about 300 mm would be enough but clearly this still needs frog switching for the A6. The water column would have to go too, to work the platform road.

I have done my test runs with a 140 mm rope. This has worked, using a battery loco and with the loco uncoupling from the rope and "running round" as it were to propel the wagon along the siding. Frog switching would let me use one of my analogue locos in its place.

I could of course try to build short dead frogs on the next layout

Richard,

I agree that 450mm sounds excessive, 140mm / 20’ feels “believable”

In which case, perhaps a push button is the way to go? SPCO? At least you can’t leave it in the wrong position and cause a short/stall on another move.

Atb
Simon

 

[Richard Gawler]

I fancy the style of pushbutton used on an old radio. You press it in and then a mechanical feature (in this case movement of the push rod) trips it back out.

 

[John57sharp]

Does anyone else have a view on how this rope shunting experiment at The Basin is likely to end up?

View attachment 229205

A few dead frogs here too….

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

I fancy the style of pushbutton used on an old radio. You press it in and then a mechanical feature (in this case movement of the push rod) trips it back out.

These will be interlocking push button switches - piano type. They are available in a multitude of configurations e.g. 6 pin, 4 row.

 

[alastairq]

I note no mention [yet] of pole shunting?

 

[Richard Gawler]

I am so sorry but I have heavily edited this post so it still makes sense in the light of posts made later on 15th December 2024

The photos are unchanged but the captions are more relevant​

Does anyone else have a view on how this rope shunting experiment at The Basin is likely to end up?

It would be most unfortunate for such misfortune to strike the railway a second time. After all, a substantial buffer stop was constructed after the first mishap. I wrote about this on my workbench thread.


The wagon was in quite a state after they hauled it out of the basin.


A different view of the incident near Newdigate colliery, taken from Warwickshire Railways.com - Mishaps

 

[Richard Gawler]

Does anyone else have a view on how this rope shunting experiment at The Basin is likely to end up?

View attachment 229205

Tony this is such an interesting picture I hope you don't mind me posting a larger version.


I can see a Moy wagon in here.

From the archive at warwickshirerailways.com: Coventry Colliery: Photograph of a rake of derailed loose coupled Newdigate Colliery wagons lying in Coventry Canal on 21st May 1885

 

[Osgood]

Tony this is such an interesting picture I hope you don't mind me posting a larger version.

View attachment 229262
I can see a Moy wagon in here.

From the archive at warwickshirerailways.com: Coventry Colliery: Photograph of a rake of derailed loose coupled Newdigate Colliery wagons lying in Coventry Canal on 21st May 1885

Not at all - I would have done so myself but couldn't recall its origin so kept it small and low key - note the NEWDIGATE watermark on the picture - I reckon from the community website or similar originally?
It would have been warwickshireraailways site I found it - a fascinating collection of information related to the regional railways.

I hadn't noticed Mr. MOY getting his feet wet before!

 

[40057]

Tony this is such an interesting picture I hope you don't mind me posting a larger version.

View attachment 229262
I can see a Moy wagon in here.

From the archive at warwickshirerailways.com: Coventry Colliery: Photograph of a rake of derailed loose coupled Newdigate Colliery wagons lying in Coventry Canal on 21st May 1885

Is that really 1885? The wagons look 20th century to me.

 

[simond]

There are certainly some features that I’d associate with RCH wagons, but I guess the RCH standards were a culmination of existing best practice, rather than a new invention. Still ~ 30 years earlier?

Shame we can’t see the brakes. Then again, if the onlookers had “seen the brakes”, perhaps we wouldn’t have the photo!

despite the obvious damage to a couple of wagons, the majority look like they could be recovered and reused. They’re clearly tough and well built.

 

[Overseer]

There are certainly some features that I’d associate with RCH wagons, but I guess the RCH standards were a culmination of existing best practice, rather than a new invention. Still ~ 30 years earlier?

Shame we can’t see the brakes. Then again, if the onlookers had “seen the brakes”, perhaps we wouldn’t have the photo!

despite the obvious damage to a couple of wagons, the majority look like they could be recovered and reused. They’re clearly tough and well built.

The captions on the Warwickshire railways website suggest the accident was between 1912 and 1923 based on the sidings on the canal wharf not appearing on maps until 1912.

 

[Osgood]

I anticipate the date of the Heybridge Basin accident being sometime around May/June 2025 - assuming Richard gets a move on and sorts out the rope shunting process.

 

[alastairq]

Also , I note the relative sizes of each wagon when compared to the barge? Not many wagon loads would have filed that barge,methinks?