Pre group wagon loads for single plank wagons.

[Compound2632]

It was the preferred method of travel for the gentry, who preferred not to be contaminated with the hoi polloi in even first class.  You could leave your country estate in your own horse drawn carriage, and sit there until you reached your destination, having been loaded onto a 'Carriage Truck'.  These developed, for the comfort of the gentry, into 'Covered Carriage Trucks', CCT's with end doors.  

 

Rolt also mentions whole special trains of carriage trucks with the gentry and nobility sitting enthroned in magnificence in them making their way to Scotland for the 'Glorious 12th'; must've been quite a sight!

 

I very seriously doubt anyone travelled in a carriage in a covered carriage truck. I would imagine that the the practice of allowing passengers to remain in their own carriage was rather quickly discontinued once the unpleasantness (to say nothing of unsafety) of travelling in such a vehicle at 30 mph - 40 mph was discovered - certainly by the time the railway was continuous to Scotland (1848). The practice long continued of conveying passengers' carriages by passenger train, on open carriage trucks, along with their horses, in horseboxes of course, whilst the well-to-do passengers travelled in family saloons. I imagine it is such a cavalcade Rolt had in mind; I'm prepared to believe he may have been romancing.

[tomparryharry]

There are a couple of LBSCR Family Saloons on Hayling Island. Two of these vehicles have been rebuilt into an substantial house. As such, The Brighton had only about 4 of these, so they are rare beasties. I'm surprised the Bluebell Railway haven't set a watching post outside the property... 

 

Ian.

[Compound2632]

There are a couple of LBSCR Family Saloons on Hayling Island. Two of these vehicles have been rebuilt into an substantial house. As such, The Brighton had only about 4 of these, so they are rare beasties. I'm surprised the Bluebell Railway haven't set a watching post outside the property... 

 

Ian.

 

I'm surprised the Brighton only had four, given the area it served. The MIdland built 40 between 1875 and 1887 but then no more for 20 years. Perhaps aristocratic journeys on the Brighton were only to or from London, one didn't go straight from ones seat in the South Downs straight to one's hunting lodge in Perthshire but stopped off at one's house in Town, so the family carriage was only booked from Euston or St Pancras.

 

Apologies - this at the opposite extreme of the traffic spectrum from the OP's humble one-plank merchandise wagon. I've worked out R&SBRy for myself - Rhondda & Swansea Bay Railway. I don't believe I've every seen a photo of an item of their rolling stock before. Quite a modern-looking steel-framed wagon with oil axleboxes and brake lever on both sides - but brakes on the far side only. I forget when the left-facing brake lever was disallowed by the BoT; that would give a latest date of building; the photo was taken on 29 April 1920. Note the securing rings for the wagon sheet ties - five along the side and three across the end. These casks have yet to be secured and sheeted.

[The Johnster]

But we still haven't got to the bottom of what a company that dealt with rendering down dead animals for glue and fertiliser needed a 1 plank wagon for.  The raw material comes in on the knacker's wagon, from somewhere fairly local, or is supplied from the abattoir, probably next door, and the process, as I understand it and it's not a thing I really want to find out more about, involves boiling it down into 3 things; an oily scum of fat an bone marrow that floats to the top and is the main constituent of the glue, a liquid waste, and bleached bones which are ground down for fertiliser.  The glue presumably goes out in drums or barrels, and the fertiliser in sacks, neither of which require anything different from a normal general merchandise wagon or a van; nothing is too big to get through the doors.  

 

So, as I see it (and there are probably other ways of seeing it than mine!), the only other material involved is some sort of chemical used in the process, perhaps acid in carboys,  and I am not sure these would require a 1 plank wagon.  But here is this company with enough work to make it worth their while owning their own wagon and painting their name on it.

 

Of course, the problem is that I don't know enough about the rendering business and how it works.  

[Compound2632]

But we still haven't got to the bottom of what a company that dealt with rendering down dead animals for glue and fertiliser needed a 1 plank wagon for.  The raw material comes in on the knacker's wagon, from somewhere fairly local, or is supplied from the abattoir, probably next door, and the process, as I understand it and it's not a thing I really want to find out more about, involves boiling it down into 3 things; an oily scum of fat an bone marrow that floats to the top and is the main constituent of the glue, a liquid waste, and bleached bones which are ground down for fertiliser.  The glue presumably goes out in drums or barrels, and the fertiliser in sacks, neither of which require anything different from a normal general merchandise wagon or a van; nothing is too big to get through the doors.  

 

So, as I see it (and there are probably other ways of seeing it than mine!), the only other material involved is some sort of chemical used in the process, perhaps acid in carboys,  and I am not sure these would require a 1 plank wagon.  But here is this company with enough work to make it worth their while owning their own wagon and painting their name on it.

 

Of course, the problem is that I don't know enough about the rendering business and how it works.  

 

The finished products in barrels or sacks would go out in railway company merchandise wagons, likewise carboys in. The tank wagon in the Montague book evidently fills a specialist wagon need that the railway companies were disinclined to provide for. Any odd load of machinery would likewise be delivered on a railway company flat or low wagon. 

[The Johnster]

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.

[Fat Controller]

The fat, after 'clarifying', would be used for candles, grease for bearings etc.

The glue would come from connective tissue and bone. This would be contained in the 'soup'

The solid matter would be blended with crushed bone , and possibly blood from the abattoir, to produce fertilisers.

However, none of these would seem to merit owning a single-plank wagon to transport it.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Per the reference I gave earlier it is evident that dead animals (whole or in pieces) unsuitable even for animal consumption were shipped about in the pre-group period to major processing concerns. A low sided wagon at a platform may well have been a very convenient vehicle to receive the dead beasts tipped off a knacker's cart standing on the platform; with the least manual handling...

[Compound2632]

The wagon illustrated in the Montague Gloucester book, No. 3 of 1906, has what would appear to be a demountable tank - this is what the (internal) dimensions of 10'0" x 5'3" x 4'0" deep previously quoted apply to. This tank has outside wooden framing and is probably metal-lined - I think one can see the metal lining folded over the top of the framing, with a couple of inches overlapping the outside framing. The tank is said to be for the conveyance of slurry. According to the Greaves index, the photo of the flatbed wagon is in Essery, Rowland & Steel, British Goods Wagons - a seminal work that I do not possess. It is presumably upon the livery in this photo that the decoration of the Bachmann wagon is based (says he, chosing his words carefully). Since that wagon is No. 1 and carries a Gloucester plate on its solebar (and is painted chocolate like No. 3) , I'm hazarding a guess that it is also from the late 1890s - 1910s; in which case it seems to me highly unlikely to be a dead ringer for a BR diagram 1/001 Lowfit! What I might suspect is that it was also for carrying slurry tanks, but without the sophistication of the guide rails and end-stops with which No. 3 is equipped.

 

Could anyone with access to British Goods Wagons describe the relevant photo?

 

How do tank-loads of slurry fit in with the various unpleasant substances already mentioned?

 

EDIT: 34"C" posted while I was typing; having re-read the article I accept that dead beasts were being transported by rail to the processing plant. But, my gut feeling is that if this was being done on any scale it would require a larger fleet of wagons than we have evidence for for Morris & Griffin so these would probably be railway company wagons; in any case flat or 1-plank wagons seem to me unlikely given the difficulty of roping the load. Would a wagon full of rotting carcasses have been sheeted? It all sounds very unpleasant for the railway or company employees who had to clean out the wagon (and sheet) before its next trip - perhaps mineral wagons were used. The article describes unloaded wagons left standing for some time, attracting all sorts of vermin, so perhaps cleaning out by natural scavengers was the best solution?

Edited September 1, 2018 by Compound2632

[Fat Controller]

This British Railways publication may be of interest. One thing that is mentioned is the risk of anthrax when moving 'wet' hides, along with what precautions should be taken.

http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20425_Issue.pdf

[Compound2632]

This British Railways publication may be of interest. One thing that is mentioned is the risk of anthrax when moving 'wet' hides, along with what precautions should be taken.

http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20425_Issue.pdf

 

Brilliant. I've an old magazine article on wagon loading which was evidently based on this document - some of the diagrams in the article are direct copies [Jeffrey Hawkins, Wagon Loading: the secrets explained, Model Railway News, January 1969].

 

I note that instruction No. 3, "Bones, fat and offal to glue works" specifies the use of mineral wagons - steel bodied preferred by 1957 - with no mention of sheeting.

[The Johnster]

Per the reference I gave earlier it is evident that dead animals (whole or in pieces) unsuitable even for animal consumption were shipped about in the pre-group period to major processing concerns. A low sided wagon at a platform may well have been a very convenient vehicle to receive the dead beasts tipped off a knacker's cart standing on the platform; with the least manual handling...

 

This makes sense, especially if the carcass was wrapped in a tarp or similar; it could just be rolled with pinchbars off whatever brought it in onto the wagon.

[The Johnster]

The wagon illustrated in the Montague Gloucester book, No. 3 of 1906, has what would appear to be a demountable tank - this is what the (internal) dimensions of 10'0" x 5'3" x 4'0" deep previously quoted apply to. This tank has outside wooden framing and is probably metal-lined - I think one can see the metal lining folded over the top of the framing, with a couple of inches overlapping the outside framing. The tank is said to be for the conveyance of slurry. According to the Greaves index, the photo of the flatbed wagon is in Essery, Rowland & Steel, British Goods Wagons - a seminal work that I do not possess. It is presumably upon the livery in this photo that the decoration of the Bachmann wagon is based (says he, chosing his words carefully). Since that wagon is No. 1 and carries a Gloucester plate on its solebar (and is painted chocolate like No. 3) , I'm hazarding a guess that it is also from the late 1890s - 1910s; in which case it seems to me highly unlikely to be a dead ringer for a BR diagram 1/001 Lowfit! What I might suspect is that it was also for carrying slurry tanks, but without the sophistication of the guide rails and end-stops with which No. 3 is equipped.

 

Could anyone with access to British Goods Wagons describe the relevant photo?

 

How do tank-loads of slurry fit in with the various unpleasant substances already mentioned?

 

EDIT: 34"C" posted while I was typing; having re-read the article I accept that dead beasts were being transported by rail to the processing plant. But, my gut feeling is that if this was being done on any scale it would require a larger fleet of wagons than we have evidence for for Morris & Griffin so these would probably be railway company wagons; in any case flat or 1-plank wagons seem to me unlikely given the difficulty of roping the load. Would a wagon full of rotting carcasses have been sheeted? It all sounds very unpleasant for the railway or company employees who had to clean out the wagon (and sheet) before its next trip - perhaps mineral wagons were used. The article describes unloaded wagons left standing for some time, attracting all sorts of vermin, so perhaps cleaning out by natural scavengers was the best solution?

A demountable, presumably rectangular tank in a frame for slurry makes sense; I'm getting a clearer mental picture now.  Slurry, in this sense, probably means something very unpleasant indeed; the semi-liquid mess hosed off the factory floor after the other procedures had been carried out.  We are probably looking at a trip every few days, perhaps once a week, when the tank is full, but where it went and what was done with it when it got there is anyone's guess.  Contained within the tank, it would not be so unpleasant for anyone in the vicinity.

[Steamport Southport]

Anyone remember bin trains?

 

Some of those were a little bit stinky. 

 

 

 

Jason

[The Johnster]

So were milk tanks; the stuff got spilled on the outside during loading and went off.  Ugh!

[eastglosmog]

Whilst digging around, I came across this on the Buckscc.guv.uk website:

Coprolites are fossilized animal dung.  They have a high phosphate content and were mined in the ninteenth and early twentieth centuries for fertilizer manufacture.   I suspect this is what was carried on the Morris & Griffiths 1 plank wagons as phosphate is quite heavy.

[Compound2632]

Fascinating! But forgive me for doubting - this sounds like mineral wagon traffic to me. It wasn't unusual for mineral wagons conveying minerals denser than coal to be filled to their maximum load by weight but not by volume. Coprolite would be in this category along with limestone. What's to stop the coprolite rolling off a 1-plank wagon?

[Nearholmer]

I’m a doubter too.

 

Where a Railway was used, Coprolites were usually carried from pit to washing point in ‘contractors wagons’, so that pictures of such operations look exactly like ironstone workings.

 

My surmise would be that onward transport would be exactly as for ironstone, which means either three-plankers or ‘under-volume’ higher-sided wagons.

[eastglosmog]

I take your points, but would refer you back to my post #9 above.  Talbot in LNWR Miscellany (vol1) shows a 1 plank LNWR wagon carrying sand and gravel sized material (I believe in Liverpool docks and could even be Coprolites for all I know).  As I said, phosphate is heavy.

[Fat Controller]

Anyone remember bin trains?

 

Some of those were a little bit stinky. 

 

 

 

Jason

Bin trains still run, though thankfully they use closed containers these days.

[Guy Rixon]

Animal remains bleed. I have just fed my dogs their chopped, raw offal and shall feed same to the nitwit who designed the packaging if I can find him. Any meat not moved as a whole carcass is going to make a foul mess of a wagon. I suspect strongly that the M&G wagons were bought privately to avoid arguments with the railway companies over cleaning.

[Caledonian]

While the wagon in question isn't marked as internal user, its possible that it was only used for relatively short trip workings, perhaps just a single out and back diagram, in which case some of the loading constraints may not have been so stringent as they would be for something going further afield

Edited September 2, 2018 by Caledonian

[The Johnster]

They would, if the wagon was being conveyed over any running line, unless there are specific exemptions in the Sectional Appendix; I have never heard of such a thing.

[Caledonian]

I was thinking of very short trip working, say from their premises to the docks.

[The Johnster]

Maybe if the working was not over running lines, but even if it passes over running lines at a junction, the rules apply.  Not sure where  in Newport the premises were, but if they were already on the dock system you might get away with it.  I remember the cattle market in the 80s being not far from the Octopus Bridge, which was on the edge of the docks, and would imagine an abattoir based business to be in that area  But why would the company bother with a branded wagon in that case; almost nobody would see it!

Edited September 3, 2018 by The Johnster