Pre group wagon loads for single plank wagons.

[Caledonian]

That brings us back to the original question of why they possessed it in the first place

[Compound2632]

Is this Morris & Griffin's plant? Later taken over by British Glues and Chemicals?

[Axlebox]

How about an engine bed casting for stationary steam engine...easy to make and doesn't need any ropes?

[Caledonian]

Is this Morris & Griffin's plant? Later taken over by British Glues and Chemicals?

 

If it is then there's plenty of track for a one plank wagon to run over without venturing out on to the big railway

 

It may be a mistake to get too wrapped up in rendering carcases: https://www.gsia.org.uk/smart/c31.jpg

Edited September 4, 2018 by Caledonian

[Compound2632]

It may be a mistake to get too wrapped up in rendering carcases:

 

Too right!

 

I'm trying to convince myself that the Maindee works illustrated in the 1893 header is the same as the Usk Chemical Works on the 1917 OS 25" map and Britain from the Air photos I linked to. If it is, there's a waterway or dock that's been filled in. 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Compound2632

[jim.snowdon]

How about an engine bed casting for stationary steam engine...easy to make and doesn't need any ropes?

When you see how loads will move under shunting impacts, virtually every load needs to be secured if it is not to damage either itself or the wagon carrying it.

 

Jim

[Caledonian]

Too right!

 

I'm trying to convince myself that the Maindee works illustrated in the 1893 header is the same as the Usk Chemical Works on the 1917 OS 25" map and Britain from the Air photos I linked to. If it is, there's a waterway or dock that's been filled in. 

 

Its a dodgy picture. The "waterway or dock" is the River Usk: The 1914 street directory for Newport lists  

Morris,  & Griffin,  The Usk Chemical works 

 

http://www.newportpast.com/records/directories/johns1914/search.php?road=Wharfs%20(The)

[Caledonian]

Of course moving on from there, now we've identified the Usk Chemical Works as being Morris and Griffin's premises, that O.S. map shows a pretty extensive and sometimes dense network of railway tracks inside the works, so in addition to at least one wagon they must have had at least one shunter and probably more than one.

 

So far Google hasn't turned anything up but given that we're talking about Newport, a Peckett or an Avonside [or two] would seem most likely.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Caledonian

[PatB]

When you see how loads will move under shunting impacts, virtually every load needs to be secured if it is not to damage either itself or the wagon carrying it.

 

Jim

Indeed. A company I worked for once undertook some measurements of the forces on railway wagon loads. Allegedly the longitudinal accelerometers peaked at well over 20g. And that's on the all-continuous braked railways of Australia.

[Arthur]

Agreed.  So what did they need a 1 planker for so badly that they were happy to provide their own.

 

Another explanation might be that the company was involved in other activity besides the rendering of animal carcasses.

South Wales produced something else which was widely used in the manufacture of fertiliser, steel slag. That is the waste from steel making (not iron making) furnaces of which there were many in the area.

 

Most iron ores contained phosphorous, which it was important to remove during the iron to steel conversion process. Consequently, steel slag produced as a byproduct of the basic steel making process was rich in phosphorous. The value of such fertilisers was recognised by Welshman Sydney Gilchrist Thomas, who improved/developed the Bessemer process, and who made a considerable fortune from it.

 

However, though steel slag is heavy enough, a one plank seems a bit ‘small’. It was certainly carried in three plank wagons.

 

So, a possibility perhaps.

 

.

[Hair_Dave]

Slight threadmancy here, but I came in search of an answer to the same question the original post asked about. I have acquired some wagons and books from my father. Amongst them is a Morris & Griffin 1 (basically 0) plank wagon which he has made using a Slaters Gloucester underframe. One of the books was British Goods wagons, as mentioned earlier. The text gives no explanation beyond the caption, and it is something of a mystery. My guess is some form of container, however there is a lack of rope hooks on the solebars.

[Hair_Dave]

A little further research brought this up, no help to the wagon load question but an interesting read about the manufacture of artificial fertiliser.

 

http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/Museum/OtherTrades/BCN/CeresWorks.htm

[jwealleans]

When you see how loads will move under shunting impacts, virtually every load needs to be secured if it is not to damage either itself or the wagon carrying it.

Agreed and common sense would also suggest this, but evidence points to it being far from universally the case. There's an accident report on the Railways Archive site from during the Second War where unsecured steel sheets shifted on a plate wagon such that they fouled the adjacent line, ripping through the side of a passing passenger carriage and killing a number of servicemen.

 

This morning on a Facebook group for rail wagons and freight someone posted a 1973 shot of a Class 37 and a string of plate wagons with steel billets, none of which were secured.