Wagon turnover in 1970's/1980's 'general' goods yards.

[C126]

Please forgive what might be a foolish question, but can someone please tell me if a goods yard of the 1970's (wagon-load era) and/or 1980's (Speedlink) would have its wagons taken away the day after delivery by a once/twice daily trip working, or if turnover of stock was slower (e.g., 2-3 days or more).  I am curious to know about siding capacity, and whether there was space for wagons remaining for a few days, as well as the (twice?-)daily delivery and returns to the local marshalling yard(s).

 

I assume a yard's capacity was calculated as: 1x train length for delivery, 1x train length for returning, and a fan of sidings for the allocated wagons of each arriving daily train.  Or would there be also extra capacity for wagons 'loitering' a while?

 

Is this situation correct, or have I misunderstood how trip freights to terminals worked?  Many thanks for any advice.

[Mike Storey]

It may help you get the responses you need by being a little more specific about what type of yard you want to design?

 

General user goods yards, as such, were increasingly rare through the 1980's, although there were still quite a few about in the 1970's. But usage would have been declining so capacity would have rarely been an issue for most.

 

On the other hand, many more yards existed for single users (whether privately owned or still part of the BR network), who would have had a constant demand for a specific type of traffic (coal, oil, cars, steel, scrap, wood, gypsum, china clay, gas, construction materials etc), which would have been tripped from a main (or marshalling) yard, cut to the limits of their capacity (and more often, sent from the origin at that capacity). The yard would have been inherited and adapted/rationalised, or perhaps specially built, with their predicted demand in mind. So, a daily trip might indeed require additional sidings for an arrival and a departure, or it would probably be the case that departures (whether empty or loaded) would be removed on a trip, before the next inwards trip would be made. The usual space problem was not for the usual flows, but for additional flows, or for stopped wagons (usually with hot axle boxes) which could only be moved very slowly (on skates often), so overnight normally, or could not be moved at all and had to await attention on site. Often the space to build in additional capacity, where it was only sometimes needed, was at a premium, especially in town sites. So front line staff would simply have to find ways to work around the problem.

 

Does that help you better define what you are trying to achieve? It would also help if you could say which part of the country you are thinking of. My practical experiences of such matters are limited to the Southern and Eastern for example.

[The Stationmaster]

Please forgive what might be a foolish question, but can someone please tell me if a goods yard of the 1970's (wagon-load era) and/or 1980's (Speedlink) would have its wagons taken away the day after delivery by a once/twice daily trip working, or if turnover of stock was slower (e.g., 2-3 days or more).  I am curious to know about siding capacity, and whether there was space for wagons remaining for a few days, as well as the (twice?-)daily delivery and returns to the local marshalling yard(s).

 

I assume a yard's capacity was calculated as: 1x train length for delivery, 1x train length for returning, and a fan of sidings for the allocated wagons of each arriving daily train.  Or would there be also extra capacity for wagons 'loitering' a while?

 

Is this situation correct, or have I misunderstood how trip freights to terminals worked?  Many thanks for any advice.

 

In terms of servicing goods depots and yards the frequency of trips to bring in and clear traffic depended very much on the level of business and the capacity of the yard.  Smaller stations and terminals would very often only be shunted once a day - but again it depended on traffic needs and the availability of resources to do the shunting.  Siding a capacity by that period was far more a matter of what happened to be there already rather than anything being laid in new although a few new terminals were developed for specialised traffics or specific customers - if space permitted. 

 

I think generally the idealistic numbers used in past days were largely out of teh window by then due to cost considerations.  For example many oil terminals - even wuite busy ones - had two roads and one would have a train on unloading for however long it took while the next block train to arrive would go into the empty road before the discharged train was pulled out.  But sometimes when things got busy there could be trains for discharge on both roads

 

By then, especially after TOPS came in during 1974, there was increasing emphasis on reducing the wagon fleet and much of that was achieved by getting shot of the thousands of wagons which hung around empty and that in turn meant sidings could also be got rid of.   With private owner wagons that sort of control was already being exercised by the wagon owner or lessee as he wanted to minimise his costs - and wagons hanging around empty were really recognised as a waste of money.

 

In the late 1980s I had the pleasure of being able to plan a (coal loading) terminal with virtually no restrictions on cost and simply a specified tonnage throughput to work to in my plan.  I also had to decide the maximum length of trains which would be used and that in turn influenced the number of trains which would be required daily which meant I could establish a frequency which in turn gave me a lead on how many trains would be at the terminal at one time although I had to allow for peaks and troughs in the time available to run trains over routes quite heavily used by passenger trains.  But when it came down to it I had to limit the number of arrival/departure sidings (duel use) plus trains loading (two simultaneously) so the terminal had no spare siding allowance at all - it simply could not accommodate again 'loitering' wagons - they would all be doing something most of the time.

[clachnaharry]

As far as I could see, from observing the pick up freights on the Aberdeen/Inverness line in the 1970's, at an intermediate yard like Inverurie, the engine would drop off any wagons for delivery, and the guard would check if any empties were available for pick up. Any wagons which had not yet been unloaded were left until the following day.

 

By that time there was no shortage of siding capacity.

 

 

[Fat Controller]

At the very end of the 1970s/ beginnings of the 1980s, I worked at one of BR's last general 'full-loads' terminals, at Longport, Stoke-on-Trent. It was unusual in that staff from customers worked alongside BR staff. At the time, traffic handled included:-

Ferry-vans carry bagged minerals; unloaded by non-BR staff, like myself, and usually turned round within the day. Not bad for 65t of gypsum in 60 kg sacks.

China clay in Highfits; BR staff- again usually same day

Rod-in-coil; BR staff. Turnround varied upon availability of lorries to move it to customers, as it was a sod to stack.

Guinness in Vanfits; usually emptied within a day, the wagon then being loaded with empties next day.

There was no standage for 'spare' wagons not being loaded or unloaded within the yard. The next load of inbound wagons, and any empties awaiting clearing, would be stored on one of the loops on the rump of the Pinnox branch. Inbound trips would come from the yard adjacent to Stoke station, usually once a day, whilst the cleared empties would be tripped to Cockshute yard once or twice a day

[C126]

May I thank you all for the replies received so far, and and apologise for any confusion caused.  I did not realise such 'general user' yards had almost died out by the 1980's.  Having seen so many photographs on this site, I thought some yards that survived into the Speedlink era still had sidings for irregular dispatches by rail (e.g., a large yard in Bristol somewhere?).  I wanted to model such a (smaller) arrangement (which now seems verging on total phantasy, especially as I wanted to base it on the Southern) with a siding to a warehouse, plus two either side of a hard-standing.  This got me wondering how many extra sidings I would need for operational requirements.  I thought yards in this time would handle, if offered, intermittant but economic, traffic flows.  Now it appears not, alas.

 

Sorry for my pauses in reading/contributing.  Access to computer and internet is irregular at the moment with me.  Thanks again to you all.

[Mike Storey]

May I thank you all for the replies received so far, and and apologise for any confusion caused.  I did not realise such 'general user' yards had almost died out by the 1980's.  Having seen so many photographs on this site, I thought some yards that survived into the Speedlink era still had sidings for irregular dispatches by rail (e.g., a large yard in Bristol somewhere?).  I wanted to model such a (smaller) arrangement (which now seems verging on total phantasy, especially as I wanted to base it on the Southern) with a siding to a warehouse, plus two either side of a hard-standing.  This got me wondering how many extra sidings I would need for operational requirements.  I thought yards in this time would handle, if offered, intermittant but economic, traffic flows.  Now it appears not, alas.

 

Sorry for my pauses in reading/contributing.  Access to computer and internet is irregular at the moment with me.  Thanks again to you all.

 

They still existed on the Southern in the 1980's but were simply not very busy! For example, we still had a general users yard at Sittingbourne, part of the BR network but nominally "operated" by a firm called AJ Wood (we did all the shunt moves, but they did the unloading and sweeping out), who had once been primarily a fruit importer but were acting as agents for a wide variety of things by the 1980's. It just had an open canopy, rather than a shed, on one road. The adjacent roads were all open, and a substantial part of it was laid in concrete hardstanding. All loads were inwards when I was there (1982-4) and all were ferry vans, bar one or two from Scotland, and included Italian cane furniture, full bottles of Evian mineral water from, er, Evian, loads of Spanish onions (when Tonbridge Transfesa depot was full), whisky from Scotland, and a number of other things I can't remember. We would get perhaps four vans tripped up from Dover maybe once a week, more when the onions came. I had to make out the return six-part consignment notes for each wagon, as I was the only one of us who knew how to do it...You can still see the layout of the yard vaguely on Google Earth, and it had more than enough room, so we also used it for storing any surplus traffic destined for the Isle of Sheppey, or stopped (broken) wagons, particularly from the Bowaters yard across the bridge which had china clay TTA tanks from Cornwall, or bogie China Clay tanks from France. Occasionally we would have a complete train in there, such as a car train on its way from Dover to Willesden, on which a hot box had been detected in one of the centre wagons.

 

I am sure there must have been similar yards still operating in the south elsewhere by then. So you would not be wrong to model such a yard on the SR, but you will have to be inventive about its traffic if it is to hold any operating interest!

[Fat Controller]

Southampton used to boast a pair of yards until quite late on: Bevois Park and Northam.

Bevois Park was on the Up side, and had a cement terminal, as well as general freight traffic (copper ingots for Pirelli cable factory, bricks and tiles spring to mind). It is still in use, though the only traffic handled is stone from Peak Forest.

Northam was on the Down side, about where the EMU depot now is, and had two further cement terminals, a steel terminal, and a siding to the coal depot at Dible's Wharf.

[Rivercider]

ICI Severnside was still dispatching bagged fertiliser in vanfits to a number of terminals, including Chichester, up to about 1978 or 1979.

Other locations that handled freight included Poole, and Hamworthy.

 

Also Andover was one of the terminals for UKF fertilizer trains from Ince & Elton.

On the WR a firm called M Thomas unloaded the fertilizer at Bridgwater and Plymouth depots, and they also handled other Speedlink traffic from the same siding.

I don't know if Andover, for example,  dealt with any other traffic besides the UKF trains.

 

cheers

[Simon Lee]

Canterbury West was part common user, with an oil depot as well. We sent wagons of furniture from Europe via the 0617 Dover Town - Tonbridge. Wagons would be delivered on day 1 and normally picked up on day 2 by the same service.

[C126]

May I, again, thank you all for your contributions.  It is good to know what wagon-loads were handled in the last few years of such yards.  I had Chichester and Crawley New Yards in mind, but what prompted my ideas were the splendid 'daily routine' photographs of Rochester Yard, etc., on another thread here a while ago.

 

It occurred to me that if a model is built to handle two feet of OO wagons (not including loco) in a daily train, if one has three loading/un-loading sidings these need be only eight inches long in theory.  I was hoping for an excuse to use longer sidings, and more than necessary as the model's space would allow.  One sees layouts in magazines where every siding has wagons on it, but presumably this is less accurate for 1970's/1980's practice.

 

Thanks and best wishes again to you all.

[Rivercider]

May I, again, thank you all for your contributions.  It is good to know what wagon-loads were handled in the last few years of such yards.  I had Chichester and Crawley New Yards in mind, but what prompted my ideas were the splendid 'daily routine' photographs of Rochester Yard, etc., on another thread here a while ago.

 

It occurred to me that if a model is built to handle two feet of OO wagons (not including loco) in a daily train, if one has three loading/un-loading sidings these need be only eight inches long in theory.  I was hoping for an excuse to use longer sidings, and more than necessary as the model's space would allow.  One sees layouts in magazines where every siding has wagons on it, but presumably this is less accurate for 1970's/1980's practice.

 

Thanks and best wishes again to you all.

I suppose Rule 1 could always apply and you can build your yard as big, or as small, as you like, however I sense that you want to try to keep things plausible.

I find it helped my layout to have a back story to explain why the yard is as it is.

If you want to have longer sidings than the traffic being handled justifies then that would be fine, many yards became like that towards the end.  

 

Around the BR network there were many yards where the remaining traffic only occupied a small fraction of the space and most sidings were empty, or had been lifted.

There were also a number of yards that remained quite full and sometimes congested, possibly because traffic from other closed yards in the area had been concentrated on the one surviving yard, (Bristol Kingsland Road was an example).

 

How you operate will also depend on what you enjoy, or hope to achieve.

It would be possible to fill the yard with wagons to create a shunting puzzle shuffling the same wagons around.

Or you could try to shunt the yard in a prototype manner, perhaps using a random traffic generator (dice?) to determine what traffic arrives, and departs.

 

To go back to your original question about the rate of wagon turnover, the answer is of course that 'it depends'!

Some traffic, like the UKF fertilizer traffic generally arrived early in the day by train, or part trainload, and the empties were cleared later that day.

Some Speedlink traffic would also come in, and out later the same day, but might also not go away until the next day.

Sometimes empties for loading might accumulate over a couple of days prior to cartage and cranage being arranged to load the wagons prior to departure,

Bridgwater was an example where that sometimes happened.

 

The variations are limitless.

 

cheers

[Fat Controller]

 

I don't know if Andover, for example,  dealt with any other traffic besides the UKF trains.

 

cheers

Andover was (possibly still is ) operated by an international freight forwarder, so not impossible that deliveries, apart from fertiliser, came by rail

[Vanders]

Lawrence Hill was still handling bagged cement up into the mid-80's, along with the more usual presflo bulk traffic and I think possibly still handling the occasional 16t mineral to be tripped up the branch to Avonside?

[SED Freightman]

Andover was (possibly still is ) operated by an international freight forwarder, so not impossible that deliveries, apart from fertiliser, came by rail

 

Andover did handle some grain traffic in air braked wagons (polybulk & minibulk) as part of the Grainflow network operated by Traffic Services Ltd (I think) for a while in the 1980's.  The former UKF depot building was leased by Switch Transport after the fertiliser traffic had finished, but as far as I am aware the only rail traffic they have handled was a trial movement of bagged fertilised from J&H Bunn at Great Yarmouth in the mid 1990's.  At the time I had a conversation with the then manager at Switch who advised that they received several loaded 40ft trailers a day from the continent and he was at a loss to understand why the traffic could not pass by rail as the daily Eastleigh to Ludgershall trip ran round in the nearby sidings and appeared to have plenty of spare capacity.  Apparently his efforts to interest the newly privatised railway in this traffic had come to nothing as the Ludgershall trip was operated by EWS for the MoD and any international traffic would have required the involvement of EWS International, as Railfreight Distribution had become by then, and who were rapidly reducing their wagonload network.

[ColinK]

A good question and some very interesting answers. Got me thinking about my model freight. Thanks for all the contributions.

[Rivercider]

Lawrence Hill was still handling bagged cement up into the mid-80's, along with the more usual presflo bulk traffic and I think possibly still handling the occasional 16t mineral to be tripped up the branch to Avonside?

Lawrence Hill handled bulk cement and bagged cement for Aberthaw Cement, also bulk cement and molasses was tripped down the Avonside branch.

There was a weighbridge at Lawrence Hill so occasionally wagons came in for weighing, which included 16t minerals of scrap from the scrapyards at Stapleton Road, which I think went to Llanelli. 

Here is the yard at Lawrence Hill in 1981

Lawrence Hill Yard, the weighbridge is on the left beside the station,the Avonside branch was accessed from the right hand siding, 22/4/81

 

cheers 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Rivercider