Early days and beyond

[844fan]

Hey all,

This is something I've been kind of wondering for a while. What sparked it was the Thomas and Friends special where they introduced Stephen AKA The Rocket of Rainhill (I have it on good authority of a friend from Sodor Island Forums that Stephen is Rocket for that universe) in said film Stephen tries to pull a set of contemporary 7 plank trucks filled with stone. Now if these are standard 16 ton trucks then he would of been trying at first to pull 120 tons at the start and only 30 by the end of it (Everytime he failed to move the uncoupled a truck till he only had one left)

 

This makes full sense as Rocket was designed to pull much smaller chaldron  wagons in long rakes. But that got me to wondering what kind of wagon would of been between the two extremes? Between chaldron and the 7 plank thirty ton open end truck what kind would be useable by a Terrier or a A Jones Goods as well as Rocket and still get more of a load?

 

Basically the middle of the wagon evolution is the kind of thing I'd love to see. 

Edited June 11, 2017 by 844fan

[LMS2968]

_{Actually, the real 'Rocket' was designed to move three times its own weight, including the tender. 'Rocket' at the Trials weighed 4T 5cwt, so the load was 12T 15cwt. After the Trials she was used on sight-seeing tours of the completed sections of the  line at the Liverpool end, then moved to the Chat Moss section to move materials there, and she is known to work 40T trains and probably more.}

 

_{The issue, as always, isn't what the loco can get on the move, but the load that the boiler can provide sufficient steam to keep on the move. 'Rocket' was designed to meet the Trials conditions and move its load 1 3/4 miles (1/8 mile acceleration, 1 1/2 miles running, 1/8 miles deceleration) and back ten times, then a fifteen minutes break to take on coke and water, then repeat. This was more or less the equivalent of a return trip on the completed Liverpool & Manchester main line. She was never really intended to work trains, just win the Trials}

[Nick Holliday]

I am not sure where your "standard" 30 ton wagon came from. The typical steel open of BR days carried a 16 ton load and I don't think it's tare weight would have been 14 tons, and a seven plank wagon would have been lighter, and probably couldn't take such a load.

However, if you want a quick set of examples showing the development of wagons, visit the 5&9 Models website. The first part of his wagon page runs through an LBSCR timeline, but further down there are some examples from the very early days too.

[Killian keane]

I thought those were 16 ton wagons also, if you look at the well known prints of locomotion on the S&D opening day, she seems to be hauling a seemingly endless line of chauldrons, (35 or so if I remember correctly) which would weigh more than 8 16 tonners, later reports say '8 wagons was as many as she could trail', the Rocket on the other hand was an express loco, so could pull less, but I would still say she could pull more than the one wagon shown in the episode, I think a lot of the stuff they do with Stephen is for comic effect,like exaggerating how slow and weak he is, in reality the rocket would be faster and stronger than that, also chauldron wagons were used up until surprisingly recently, there are pictures of them running with electric catenary locomotives, and there is film on youtube of them being used up until at least 1970 at seaham harbour, even in the early '80s there were steel bodied wagons clearly inspired by chauldrons at various ncb colliery lines

Edited June 10, 2017 by Killian keane

[The Johnster]

Might be worth asking the NRM what their replica can pull; they steam it occasionally and should have a pretty good idea.  The boiler and cylinders are the same size as the originals, so the haulage performance should be more or less identical, allowing for the fact that modern stcok in good condition will offer less rolling resistance than wooden framed wagons with greased horsehair axleboxes.

[eastglosmog]

There is a tale (probably exaggerated) that Rocket managed 53mph on the Brampton Railway in 1837. No records of how many wagons it could pull, though and it was laid aside in 1840/1  as being too light.

[Killian keane]

There is a tale (probably exaggerated) that Rocket managed 53mph on the Brampton Railway in 1837. No records of how many wagons it could pull, though and it was laid aside in 1840/1 as being too light.

With her cylinders at their current position it might be within realms of possibility, (just!) in her L&M days she got up to nearly 40mph, as a matter of fact didn't she once turn over?

[eastglosmog]

I think she had been rebuilt with low angle cylinders by then, but I'm still very skeptical of the story!  Suspect whoever was timing it had their watch shaken up so much it was running slow.

[jonny777]

Hey all,

This is something I've been kind of wondering for a while. What sparked it was the Thomas and Friends special where they introduced Stephen AKA The Rocket of Rainhill (I have it on good authority of a friend from Sodor Island Forums that Stephen is Rocket for that universe) in said film Stephen tries to pull a set of contemporary 7 plank trucks filled with stone. Now if these are standard 30 ton trucks then he would of been trying at first to pull 120 tons at the start and only 30 by the end of it (Everytime he failed to move the uncoupled a truck till he only had one left)

 

This makes full sense as Rocket was designed to pull much smaller chaldron  wagons in long rakes. But that got me to wondering what kind of wagon would of been between the two extremes? Between chaldron and the 7 plank thirty ton open end truck what kind would be useable by a Terrier or a A Jones Goods as well as Rocket and still get more of a load?

 

Basically the middle of the wagon evolution is the kind of thing I'd love to see. 

 

 

I don't think that it took too long in the mid-19th century for locos to become powerful enough to haul wagons with a 7 or 8 ton capacity. I think these weighed 4 or 5 tons tare. So 11-13t all up. Ten of these would not have been too much of a trailing load, as long as there were no steep gradients en-route.

 

It was quite handy in the UK that most early collieries were in the hills, and it was only the returning empties that went uphill on the majority of lines.

[Killian keane]

There is a record of no. 10 "Magestic" (northumbrian class) taking 20 wagons but sticking on Sutton incline for lack of steam, but I don't know if they were loaded or not

[LMS2968]

The standard British open wagon for many years was about 6 tons tare and carried 10, later 12, tons. These would not have arrived during the S&DR / L&MR period. The incident with 'Rocket's' high speed dash was on 8th August 1837 when she took the Alston election returns part way to Carlisle. The Carlisle Journal reported - eleven years after the event - that she ran four miles in 4 1/2 minutes. Shades of City of Truro and the Aspinall Atlantic, perhaps?

 

Details from 'The Engineering and History of Rocket', Michael R Bailey and John P Clithero (2000) NRM, ISBN 1 9000747 18 9

[The Johnster]

There is a record of no. 10 "Magestic" (northumbrian class) taking 20 wagons but sticking on Sutton incline for lack of steam, but I don't know if they were loaded or not

 

Sticking for lack of steam is not necessarily a result of oveloading, especially in those days.  A clogged up fire, steam leaks, inexperienced crew, brakes dragging on the wagons, not enough of a run at the bank; all sorts of things may have caused Majestic's less than majestic performance.

[Killian keane]

Sticking for lack of steam is not necessarily a result of oveloading, especially in those days. A clogged up fire, steam leaks, inexperienced crew, brakes dragging on the wagons, not enough of a run at the bank; all sorts of things may have caused Majestic's less than majestic performance.

Very true, the driver, Jack Halsam, very quickly amended the problem by tying down the safety valve, walking up the line ahead of the engine and ordering it to "COME UP YOU BEGGAR!"

Edited June 10, 2017 by Killian keane

[LMS2968]

Sticking for lack of steam is not necessarily a result of oveloading, especially in those days.  A clogged up fire, steam leaks, inexperienced crew, brakes dragging on the wagons, not enough of a run at the bank; all sorts of things may have caused Majestic's less than majestic performance.

Sutton Incline in those days was 1 in 89, so a fair climb. The 'Northumbrians' weighed in at 7 tons 7 cwt. If the wagons weighed only 8 tons loaded you're still looking at 160 tons behind the tender, a fair old load for an engine that size on that gradient.

[The Johnster]

Very true, the driver, Jack Halsam, very quickly amended the problem by tying down the safety valve, walking up the line ahead of the engine and ordering it to "COME UP YOU BEGGAR!"

 

I've always found shouting at things to be very effective.  Doesn't work with people, they just shout back...

Edited June 10, 2017 by The Johnster

[844fan]

I am not sure where your "standard" 30 ton wagon came from. The typical steel open of BR days carried a 16 ton load and I don't think it's tare weight would have been 14 tons, and a seven plank wagon would have been lighter, and probably couldn't take such a load.

However, if you want a quick set of examples showing the development of wagons, visit the 5&9 Models website. The first part of his wagon page runs through an LBSCR timeline, but further down there are some examples from the very early days too.

How did I make that mistake? Ugh must of been due to the time of night I posted. Again I live in the US and give or take a hour I am roughly six hours behind Wales. (And before you make the joke not all of us in the states are  two centuries behind. Some of us are just a few decades off  then there are those who are still stuck in the stone age compared to the rest of the world over. Baghdad Alabama seriously makes the one in Arabia look positively  friendly to everyone.)  So I was half awake. Going to amend the first post now. I'll have a good look at that LBSCR site too. 

 

I thought those were 16 ton wagons also, if you look at the well known prints of locomotion on the S&D opening day, she seems to be hauling a seemingly endless line of chauldrons, (35 or so if I remember correctly) which would weigh more than 8 16 tonners, later reports say '8 wagons was as many as she could trail', the Rocket on the other hand was an express loco, so could pull less, but I would still say she could pull more than the one wagon shown in the episode, I think a lot of the stuff they do with Stephen is for comic effect,like exaggerating how slow and weak he is, in reality the rocket would be faster and stronger than that, also chauldron wagons were used up until surprisingly recently, there are pictures of them running with electric catenary locomotives, and there is film on youtube of them being used up until at least 1970 at seaham harbour, even in the early '80s there were steel bodied wagons clearly inspired by chauldrons at various ncb colliery lines

I honestly have no clue how heavy a Chauldron was filled. I made a blasted slip up on more modern wagons so I'll need to look it up properly. Also I've seen the Seaham loco videos so I know a small loco can surprise I mean those Hoppers dwarfed a lot of tank engines. Let alone a Lewin built Tank.

 

I would say your right seeing as he seemed to be able to pull a small coach a bit smaller than Annie or Claribel which is much larger thank it was designed for so Stephen and the engine I'm figuring out all this for is probably at least as strong if not stronger due to smaller wheels than Rocket.

 

Oddly enough I would love to see a interpretation of Locomotion No. 1. I'd say they'd give it a smokebox cowl over it's funnel and have some buffers but even with those liberties I'd like to see it.

 

There is a tale (probably exaggerated) that Rocket managed 53mph on the Brampton Railway in 1837. No records of how many wagons it could pull, though and it was laid aside in 1840/1  as being too light.

Hmm I would hope not as it was Rocket may have shaken apart at that speed. I mean a loco like Sierra No. 3 tops 45 MPH and 50 MPH she shakes terribly. Be afraid Rocket would truly end up a "Rocket" At that point.

 

The standard British open wagon for many years was about 6 tons tare and carried 10, later 12, tons. These would not have arrived during the S&DR / L&MR period. The incident with 'Rocket's' high speed dash was on 8th August 1837 when she took the Alston election returns part way to Carlisle. The Carlisle Journal reported - eleven years after the event - that she ran four miles in 4 1/2 minutes. Shades of City of Truro and the Aspinall Atlantic, perhaps?

 

Details from 'The Engineering and History of Rocket', Michael R Bailey and John P Clithero (2000) NRM, ISBN 1 9000747 18 9

 

Yeah I have a good photo of a Bluebell wagon of the 12 Ton I still can't understand why I said 30. Maybe I was thinking of a Loco.

 

Perhaps Rocket could make short hops faster than wanted but to quote the late great Alan Rickman "You don't hold the Turbo down it's for quick boosts!!!" I would not advise any more than 35 MPH if she could get passed her known 30 MPH which is true.

Very true, the driver, Jack Halsam, very quickly amended the problem by tying down the safety valve, walking up the line ahead of the engine and ordering it to "COME UP YOU BEGGAR!"

Well tease a engine and like a bull it'll take on the challenge. Least he was smart enough to know not to let that valve be held down while running her with a good head of steam. Unlike the Best Friend of Charleston's driver such a foolish man.

 

I've always found shouting at things to be very effective.  Doesn't work with people, they just shout back...

And if that don't stop you they pay others to shout at you about a court or something. Waste of money if you ask me.

[kevinlms]

Don't know the details of what these early locos could pull (there is always the question of being able to START a train and being able to maintain momentum, especially when going up grades).

 

But it needs to be remembered, that these early locos could and did, haul much greater loads and faster, than the previous method of propulsion, AKA as the horse.

 

I don't ever recall any mention of a railway, that tried steam, found it unsatisfactory and reverted to the horse. Except possibly as a temporary measure, because a steam loco died. The latter could have been due to the safety valve being tied down, but even back then, this practice was known to be highly dangerous.

[LMS2968]

I don't ever recall any mention of a railway, that tried steam, found it unsatisfactory and reverted to the horse. Except possibly as a temporary measure, because a steam loco died. The latter could have been due to the safety valve being tied down, but even back then, this practice was known to be highly dangerous.

There were one or two which reverted to horse traction, but they were pre-Rainhill Trials - they caused George Stephenson some problems as about half of the L&MR directors did not favour locomotives and this added to their argument. The reason was mostly cost. Remember that these early locos used coal (the main line locos from 1830 and for some time had to use coke) in prodigious quantities, but also their weight required a better track bed and heavier rails. If these latter weren't there, then the loco couldn't run and the line's owner either relaid or returned to horses. The Pen-y-Darren line was the first here, with Richard Trevithick's first loco converted to be a steam pump.

[john new]

Many reasons for why mechanical traction did not begin to displace the horse for railed transport until the era when it did (considerably later than steam introduction in other arenas) and why the conversion rate has been so prolonged. That process is not fully completed yet as at least two horse railways/tramways remain although it was substantially so by the 1960s (yes 1960s not 1860s). For the full story you will have to await publication of last year's Early Railways Conference papers.

Edited June 11, 2017 by john new

[The Johnster]

Agreed.  It is difficult to overestimate the importance of George Stephonson's evolution of the steam locomotive from 1825's Locomotion on the Stockton and Darlington, through Rocket, Northumbrian, Planet, and Patentee, from a beam engine on rails to what is recognisably the model for British steam locomotives for the next 70 odd years, which took place over 9, yes only 9, years.  The main line railway had been developed as a result.

 

But, back in the collieries and on the waggonways and tramroads of the North East and South Wales, and elsewhere, horses were still in common use for a very long time yet, sometimes in conjunction with steam locomotives and steam powered rope inclines, not to mention for shunting on the rapidly expanding main line network.  Many of these small and isolated railways had a lot of use for horses, which were familiar, fully understood, and easily available.  As mentioned, the Penydarren tramroad, having falteringly initiated the steam locomotive revolution for a bet 20 years before the S & D opened, immediately used it's loco as a stationary boiler, occasionally hauling it around the irorworks with horses to where it was needed, as soon as Richard Crawshay handed his fiver over to Samuel Homphray (or was it the other way around?).  It used horses fro many years to come, but re-intorduced steam traction in the 1820s, including the first articulated locomotives, meanwhile still using horses alongside these cutting edge steam beasts.  The 18 mile long Tredegar Tramroad used horses exclusively until well into the 1830s when it became part of the Monmouthshire Railway and Canal Company, and that was for a run from Tredegar to Newport.

 

Locomotives required heavier, and ideally steel, rails to support their weight, and this was the biggest early problem that they had to overcome.  An early Blenkinsop on the Middleton in Leeds had steam springs, which sound very advanced, during the Napoleonic Wars, and everywhere you read of track being spread and rails broken.  A horse didn't give you such problems, and if it broke down there was another one handy.  Moreover, when a locomotive wore out it was scrap, but when a horse wore out, if it was a boy horse that had been in the company of a girl horse, you probably had a few new horses to replace it that hadn't cost you much more than a bit of feed.  Locomotives needed expensive fuel, proper supplies of water, and a skilled driver on skilled man's wages to drive; a horse could get by on a nose bag and dipping it's face in any stream or puddle it found, and anybody could 'drive' it for normal labourer's pay.  And horse explosions were, mercifully, rare...

 

Some tramroads were in isolated and remote country, including some highly mountainous terrain in South Wales and the remoter fastnesses of County Durham and the Lake District, and supplying them with steam locomotives was a difficult and expensive business; some of the Penydarren's steam locomotives were built at Hirwaun and had to be hauled on carts or sleds over Aberdare Mountain for example, while horses were available on site wherever you were, even on the Bryn Oer tramroad over Mynydd Llangattock, nearly 2,000 feet up!

Edited June 11, 2017 by The Johnster

[Steamport Southport]

What could Rocket pull? Quite a lot actually.

 

These are typical trains from the time.

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Liverpool_and_Manchester_Railway_1831_-_3.jpg

 

Lion with another one.

 

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/event/dec-england-opens-first-public-railway-using-steam-locomotives-52781317?#the-rocket-steam-locomotive-designed-by-robert-and-george-stephenson-picture-id2672343

 

Film footage.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okY9b20KVSY

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOHqmDweaWw

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3JJtEmyoQQ

 

 

You've got to remember the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was built as a mainline railway, not a colliery line. They weren't toddling along with three small coal wagons. You would be spending more on the fuel to move it than the coal carried. It was more a line to move passengers and goods between Liverpool Port and Manchester cotton mills. Cotton one way, finished clothing the other.

 

 

Jason

[john new]

My recollection of the L&M history is that the numbers of pax carried considerably exceed their advance expectations; a nice bonus and unexpected precursor of rapid social changes.

Edited June 11, 2017 by john new

[LMS2968]

Goods traffic on the L&MR never reached the anticipated levels, despite that being the traffic it was built to cry. Fortunately, the passenger numbers far exceeded expectations.

[coachmann]

I wonder how many people realise how inexpensive the steam locomotive was compared with what had gone before. Take Liverpool to Birmingham and back in 1848, the trip each way taking about 4¼ hours, stoppages included. The train of coaches weighed about 80 tons transporting 240 passengers with their luggage. The distance between these two places by railway is 95 miles. This double journey of 190 miles was affected by the mechanical force produced in the combustion of a quarter ton of coke, the value of which was 6 shillings.

 

To carry the same number of passengers daily between the same places by stage coach on a common road would have required 20 coaches and an establishment of 3,800 horses, with which the journey in each direction would be performed in about 12 hours, stoppages included.

[Killian keane]

It might be of interest to read this report of travelling on the pennydarren tramway after ot reverted to steam locomotives

http://www.irsociety.co.uk/Archives/59/Trip.htm

Just in case you were wondering, the loco on the cover of this book is the one in the article http://www.rchs.org.uk/product/merthyr-tydfil-tramroads-and-their-locomotives/

Edited June 11, 2017 by Killian keane