Jump to content

Why did some classes not go to Woodhams?


Recommended Posts

Woodham Bros bought plenty of Halls, Manors and 5101s, but as far as I know, no Counties, Granges or 61XXs. 

 

Is there any special reason why a scrapyard  would have bought one class rather than another?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What was available and the price.

 

Woodhams was competing with other scrap merchants such as Cashmores. What was bought was just pure luck.

 

ISTR there was a 61XX or two. I'll have a look.

 

Yes two. 6115 and 6131.

 

 

Jason

Edited by Steamport Southport
  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason is that some classes were withdrawn earlier than others and therefore dealt with either at Swindon or other scrappers who were more aggressive than Dai Woodham.  The use of outside scrappers only really took off as the scrapping of steam locos reached its peak in the early sixties meaning BR works could no longer cope alone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Woodham's also have a huge quantity of 16t minerals and other wagons to cut up? These pushed the steam locos back in the queue to meet the cutters torch allowing more time to save them.

 

Steven B.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Another reason is that some classes were withdrawn earlier than others and therefore dealt with either at Swindon or other scrappers who were more aggressive than Dai Woodham.  The use of outside scrappers only really took off as the scrapping of steam locos reached its peak in the early sixties meaning BR works could no longer cope alone.

 

First ones at Woodhams was 1959. Most of which were cut pretty quickly.

 

 

 

Some of the ones that did get cut are interesting. 

 

Two 1366s, 14XXs, 3170 (last Churchward large prairie), and loads of 54/64/74XXs, Moguls and virtually brand new 94XXs.

 

Pity that a few of those didn't survive as they would have been useful for heritage railways.

 

 

Jason

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Didn't Woodham's also have a huge quantity of 16t minerals and other wagons to cut up? These pushed the steam locos back in the queue to meet the cutters torch allowing more time to save them.

 

Steven B.

The wagons were the bread and butter, and could be cut up very quickly.

 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fat Controller said:

The wagons were the bread and butter, and could be cut up very quickly.

......... while the steam locos were left 'til they had more time for the complicated bits and - fortuitously - this gave some of us idiots the opportunity to relieve them of the bother !

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
30 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

What was available and the price.

 

Woodhams was competing with other scrap merchants such as Cashmores. What was bought was just pure luck.

 

ISTR there was a 61XX or two. I'll have a look.

 

Yes two. 6115 and 6131.

 

 

Jasonu

And some yards plainly liked certain types.... just look at how many  Standard 5s Cashmores dealt with, and to a lesser extent Standard 4 75xxx at Birds Long Marston. The Granges have always perplexed me too .... Woodhams were plainly buying in in 65 when many became available, just look at the purchase of the Manors from Shrewsbury (thank goodness!)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it also had to do with location as scrap merchant's had to also pay for transportation, which wasn't cheap, on top of the price they paid for the loco.  Why pay XXXX amount for a loco that was hundreds of miles away when a similar loco was a short distance away.  Even if a dealer bought several loco's and they all travelled together, it was a slow process in moving them as they had to have a path made available, usually on secondary routes, stop often to make sure the bearing weren't overheating as some loco's could have been standing outside 6 months or more and they often had someone riding in one the cabs, which made the costs add up.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

......... while the steam locos were left 'til they had more time for the complicated bits and - fortuitously - this gave some of us idiots the opportunity to relieve them of the bother !

Nevertheless Woodhams did remove the more valuable bits first - brass and copper.  

Their approach to cutting probably looked odd to outsiders too as they cut bits off wheels fairly early on.  It's remarkable that so many survived to be rescued given what had been removed.  Of course once the preservation movement became serious, Dai realised that it was worthwhile just letting them sit there festering until somebody came along with enough dosh to offer more than scrap value.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, jools1959 said:

I think it also had to do with location as scrap merchant's had to also pay for transportation, which wasn't cheap, on top of the price they paid for the loco.  Why pay XXXX amount for a loco that was hundreds of miles away when a similar loco was a short distance away.  Even if a dealer bought several loco's and they all travelled together, it was a slow process in moving them as they had to have a path made available, usually on secondary routes, stop often to make sure the bearing weren't overheating as some loco's could have been standing outside 6 months or more and they often had someone riding in one the cabs, which made the costs add up.

Not necessarily. The logic is sound but didn't always work out in practice. 2968 and 6447 went to Woodham's all the way from Springs Branch, while Central Wagon was only a mile away along the Branch. Likewise, many engines from distant - including Western and North Eastern ones - found themselves on Springs Branch shed en-route to Central wagon.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 08/07/2021 at 17:13, Michael Hodgson said:

Of course once the preservation movement became serious, Dai realised that it was worthwhile just letting them sit there festering until somebody came along with enough dosh to offer more than scrap value.   

I don't think this is quite fair to Dai, who sold his locos and bits off them by weight, the normal scrappie method, rather than market value.  The Rolls Royce was aquired by sensible business practice and hard work, not 'ripping off enthusiasts'.  The locos were retained as a backup reservoir of work for him and his men, as they preferred to cut wagon frames which were easier to deal with and gave a quicker turnaround of ready cash than the locos.  His attitude to enthusiasts was that, if they were on the up and up, he was happy to deal with them, but petty theft, vandalism, and disputes between preservationist groups understandably annoyed him.  The practice of 'letting them sit there festering' was informed by the work reservoir 'rainy day fund' approach, and not to sit on appreciating assets 'until somebody came along with enough dosh to offer more than scrap value; actually the value of the assets was increasingly depreciating in the sea air.

 

The state of affairs was for a time threatening the supply of locos to the nascent preservation movement, and those who were less understanding of Dai's personality and character fell out with him, IMHO the root of the 'Dai in his roller making millions off honest preservationists' viewpoint  (some of whom seemed to think that, as he wasn't actively cutting them, that he should give them the locos which were beginning to deteriorate), always unfair and ill-informed IMHO.  He made his money and paid for the roller and cigars by cutting wagons and other scrap; the locos were not the main part of his business, though by that time they were what he was most famous for and he took a lot of flak for not behaving in the exact way some of us thought he should.  Things were largely resolved by the formation of BSLAG by the preservationists.  This made Dai's life much easier, as he was now dealing solely with preservationists who had a more realistic, organised, and businesslike approach, but did not stop pilferage from what was an open access site and led to him or one of his brothers patrolling with a big German Shepherd at times.  It is worth mentioning that, by the late 70s, the condition of those locos left at the site was deteriorating seriously in the salty air, and the value of them to Dai was decreasing as a result as the weight of good metal was eaten by oxidisation, but he still had a pretty steady supply of wagons, by this time predominantly steel mineras, to cut.  I'd stopped visiting by then, finding the charnel house aspect of the place too depressing.

 

He was a character, was Dai, a tough, hard, hard nosed and hard working man who took no carp from anyone, and having followed Montgomery through WW2 and taken some shrapnel at Monte Cassino, why should he?  I liked him, and enjoyed seeing him motoring around Barry in the roller, in greasy dungarees and a Dai cap with the infernal cigar blazing away laying a Cheech and Chong style smoke screen.  He'd always wave back.  He was, by any measure, straight as a Dai (sorry).

Edited by The Johnster
  • Like 15
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

61264 was an odd ball… it was a late one and a far away one.

 

The J94’s were another.

 

61264 was an LMR locomotive at the time. Colwick was 16B in 1966 and a sub shed of Toton.

 

No j94s. They were MoS and arrived by road. Nothing to do with BR.

 

 

Jason

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Just now, Steamport Southport said:

 

61264 was an LMR locomotive at the time. Colwick was 16B in 1966 and a sub shed of Toton.

 

No j94s. They were MoS and arrived by road. Nothing to do with BR.

 

 

Jason

All Austerities are J94’s to me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The other oddities missing from Barry are things like WDs, Fairburn / Stanier tanks.. loads of em, and in the catchment area, and in the right years.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, and I'm not claiming to be an expert on this, by the time the main tranche of withdrawals was under way, say after about 1963, withdrawn steam locos were taken to sites from which they could be sold off by tender and distributed; Sutton Bridge at Shrewsbury was one and a lot of the Southern's locos that came to South Wales came via Gloucester; no doubt there were others.  So, when one is assessing Woodhams' 'catchment area', it is perhaps rational to identify which distribution sites were involved and the catchements of those sites.  Prior to about '63, locos were beginning to accumulate on the 'Factory roads' at Barry, which were effectively Woodhams' reception sidings, and were clearly send directly from WR sheds, mostly local ones. 

 

I know that most of Tondu's withdrawn steam locos were cut at Ward's at Tremains, Bridgend, and the other local scrappie heavily involved was Cashmores' at Pill in Newport.  Cashmores' cut 84xxx BR Standard 2MTs, none of which made it to Barry and thus became extinct.  IIRC and I'm not saying that I am sure that I do, Cashmores' cut several Granges as well.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)

I would say, controversially, that more GWR 2-8-0’s should have been scrapped, in order to save the D600s and D6121(2).

 

i know they were wrecks, I remember seeing them, but historically they were significant, and their importance was known, but recall the steam lobby were actively seeking their destruction ( whilst lining there tool boxes of everything not nailed down, and largely undeclared).


Any reason they didnt enter the diesel scrapping business ?, I know much more if this went in house but various WR diesels ended up scrapped in the outside world.

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

IIRC, and I'm not claiming to be an expert on this, by the time the main tranche of withdrawals was under way, say after about 1963, withdrawn steam locos were taken to sites from which they could be sold off by tender and distributed; Sutton Bridge at Shrewsbury was one and a lot of the Southern's locos that came to South Wales came via Gloucester; no doubt there were others.  So, when one is assessing Woodhams' 'catchment area', it is perhaps rational to identify which distribution sites were involved and the catchements of those sites.  Prior to about '63, locos were beginning to accumulate on the 'Factory roads' at Barry, which were effectively Woodhams' reception sidings, and were clearly send directly from WR sheds, mostly local ones. 

 

I know that most of Tondu's withdrawn steam locos were cut at Ward's at Tremains, Bridgend, and the other local scrappie heavily involved was Cashmores' at Pill in Newport.  Cashmores' cut 84xxx BR Standard 2MTs, none of which made it to Barry and thus became extinct.  IIRC and I'm not saying that I am sure that I do, Cashmores' cut several Granges as well.


Some locations (eg Dock Branch sidings near Over Junction, near Gloucester) were actually staging posts in final journeys to South Wales. However the locos came from all over, and particularly the SR in 1967, Salisbury shed being a particular location where withdrawn locos were collected and despatched.

 

The railway periodicals of the time had extensive reports of these final journeys. The Bournemouth electrification in 1967 replaced large quantities of SR locos, many of which ended up in S Wales scrapyards. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

All Austerities are J94’s to me.

All oranges are fruits, but not all fruits are oranges.  The Hunslet Austerities are a sub-class of Hunslet 18 and a half inch saddle tanks designed for wartime production for the MoS, and those sold as war surplus to the LNER became their class J94; there are detail differences between the standard Hunslet locos and the Austerities (frame profile, cab cutout, overhang of bunker over rear buffer beam, and depth of buffer beams), and further detail difference between both types built to Hunslet drawings by other manufacturers.  Many industrial Hunslet-designed locos of this general appearance are not specifically Austerities, only those sold by the MoS into industrial use, and only those MoS locos sold to the LNER should be regarded as J94s. 

 

Satsumas are fruits as well, and look like oranges, but are not.  I'll grant you that there is a blurred line between satsumas, clementines, and tangerines, but non of them are oranges.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I would say, controversially, that more GWR 2-8-0’s should have been scrapped, in order to save the D600s and D6121(2).

i know they were wrecks, I remember seeing them, but historically they were significant, and their importance was known.


Any reason they didnt enter the diesel scrapping business ?, I know much more if this went in house but various WR diesels ended up scrapped in the outside world.

 


I would think it was a matter of location - Claytons, class 21 and some 28 to Glasgow - 23 to Cransley. However, after Swindon started scrapping diesels in quantity, there were reports in the railway press of parts, for instance of identified Hymek locos being noted in trains of scrap travelling north! I guess they cut out the middle man (and kept staff busy as well). D6122 (1), D600 and D601 were wrecks when I saw them around 1968/9 - D600’s bleached blue and yellow livery was particularly shocking!! 
 

Im afraid that at that time, the largest proportion of enthusiasts were largely interested in steam and chasing it. This is why the relative quantity of everyday diesel photos from that time is low. It was a couple of years before diesel preservation and mass enthusiasm became a thing. 

 

As an indication of this, the volume of letters and articles concerning why steam is superior and should never have been retired occurred with regularity over the years 1967-70 or so. A sign of the times I guess! 

Edited by MidlandRed
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 08/07/2021 at 16:58, jools1959 said:

I think it also had to do with location as scrap merchant's had to also pay for transportation, which wasn't cheap, on top of the price they paid for the loco.  Why pay XXXX amount for a loco that was hundreds of miles away when a similar loco was a short distance away.  Even if a dealer bought several loco's and they all travelled together, it was a slow process in moving them as they had to have a path made available, usually on secondary routes, stop often to make sure the bearing weren't overheating as some loco's could have been standing outside 6 months or more and they often had someone riding in one the cabs, which made the costs add up.

Not necessarily....  A couple of examples 'off the top of my head' are:

Several panniers including 7752 Edit 7753 withdrawn from Tondu made the journey north to be cut up at Central Wagon at Ince nr.Wigan.  I bought the brass cabside plate for a quid!

Conversely 76077/9/84 withdrawn from Springs Branch Wigan went to Barry, in convoy, arriving in Sept 1968.

Strange, but it happened.

Ray.

Edited by Marshall5
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...