ianwales Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Hi all When did the triple header Port Talbot iron ore workings start, are there any records of these trains with class 37's carrying pre TOPS numbers? Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve-e Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 From the 37 photo thread is this http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/72757-class-37-photos/?p=1326174 Looking for photos the earliest I can find is this one in 1976 https://www.flickr.com/photos/geoffsimages/9804495623/in/photostream/ and this site http://www.martinbray-ukloco.com/margam.htm also seems to suggest late 1970's Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The R.O. makes mention of "Cl.37s in multiple" (not stipulating how many) earlier, employing rakes of 18 (102 ton) tipplers; but my earliest sighting of a triple-header was at Cardiff Central on Friday 30th. July, 1976, comprising 37302+37306+37307.A week later, Friday 6th. August, I recorded 1976, 37304+37306+37302 at Cardiff Central. . I have a 1977 Driver's Load Book which details the maximum loads for double and triple headed Cl.37s. . The locos employed (initially just 37300-37308) were fitted with strengthened drawgear. . I don't recall pre-TOPS numbered locos being employed on the services. . Brian R . PS "I refer the house to my answer to a previous question " . http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/72757-class-37-photos/page-14&do=findComment&comment=1326174 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The triple headers started after the introduction of HSTs - The train did not need 3 class 37's to shift it, it needed the power to accelerate the train to 60mph as quickly as possible and keep it there in order to path it between the HSTs without delaying them. Not sure when the practice finished, but it would most likely be due to timetable changes and/or change in flow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The triple headers started after the introduction of HSTs - The train did not need 3 class 37's to shift it, it needed the power to accelerate the train to 60mph as quickly as possible and keep it there in order to path it between the HSTs without delaying them. Not sure when the practice finished, but it would most likely be due to timetable changes and/or change in flow. Not just to get the train up to 60 mph, but to enable it to top Stormy Bank at more than walking pace. The 37s were replaced by pairs of 56s, and these in turn by single Class 60s. Shame to see it all gone; I remember seeing Llanwern being built, and my father being invited to the opening of the Deep-Water Terminal at Port Talbot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Due to the delay in delivery of the 60s - pairs of heavyweight 37s were used for a while. . I was always struck by the overpowering smell from the brakes on the tipplers. . Several years ago, a rake of the tipplers were lying at Tidal. . Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Didn't part of a rake end up laying in a Newport street at one point too.................. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 No, not Newport - the derailment was at, give or take, Cardiff (East Jct.) alongside Custom House St. Cardiff at the up end of Cardiff Central. . Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 Pairs of Cl.56s were officially introduced on the Port Talbot - Llanwern circuit from 6th. August, 1979. . At that time, the pool contained 56035/36/38/41/43 Two pairs were initially employed as follows. . Dia.1 dep Port Talbot at 05:30, 13:05 and 20:05 Dia.2 dep Port Talbot at 08:20, 15:30 and 01:10 . On the first day 56035+56038 and 56041+56043 were employed . The pool was soon joined by 56033 & 56037, but 56036 which was in large logo livery was returned to the LMR for publicity purposes. . When Cl.56s were unavailable, triple headed 37s would be drafted into the diagrams, such as happened during December 1979. Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HGT1972 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 The trains were supposed to have started in August 1974 but were delayed for ages due to an industrial dispute between BSC and the National Union of Blastfurnacemen over the train operations - so, by stretching reality you could use pre-TOPS class 37s and claim a test run! They started running in 18-wagon test rakes from 3 February 1975 with pairs of 37s but the first 27-wagon set with three locos ran on 15 March 1976 (with 2,084 tons of ore if anyone's interested!). Hope that helps? Hywel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkea1 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 This brings back memories of spending a week one summer building a fire escape on my mate's dad's pub in the late 90's. The pub was near to the old Ely station site and so in between welding sessions I spent a lot of time watching the comings and goings on the SWML. The sound of the 60's on the iron ore trains will never be forgotten! Alastair Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 What would blastfurnacemen have to do with the length of trains? Were they worried they would have to do more work? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivercider Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Looking at Paul Bartletts site the build dates for the tippler fleet is 1973/74. This would presumably have considerably simpiified working at Llanwern, perhaps blastfurnacemen were involved in unloading ore and this meant job cuts? cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted January 23, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 23, 2015 See post 20 in this thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/75534-rail-blue-tops-late-70s/ Cracking trains!!! Sorry but haven't logged date or locos Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What would blastfurnacemen have to do with the length of trains? Were they worried they would have to do more work? No, less work!! Between 1974 and 1976, when it came into blast, the Blastfurnacemens Union at Llanwern were in negotiations with the BSC over manning levels for the No. 3 blast furnace which was then under construction. This furnace, the first of a new design of furnace in the UK, was also considerably larger than anything else in the country with a planned output of 5,000 tons/day. That compared to outputs of 1,200 tons/day for each of the existing, No.s 1 & 2, pretty typical of similar 'modern' furnaces at other British works. Not only was this furnace able to produce considerably more iron, it was largely automated requiring fewer operatives. The union were keen to protect jobs and were demanding manning levels higher than the BSC thought necessary. The new furnace was also going to more than double the ore requirement at the works, all by then imported via Port Talbot, and new handling arrangements were installed in preparation, including the new rail service. The new ore handling plant, despite it's much greater output, required fewer operatives for the three furnaces than did the old for two. Most of the men involved in these processes would have been members of the N.U.B. and I SUSPECT, I don't know, that the dispute over the handling of the new ore trains was all part of the ongoing wrangling over how many operatives the new plant should employ. Happy to be put right if somebody knows the actual reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 No, less work!! Between 1974 and 1976, when it came into blast, the Blastfurnacemens Union at Llanwern were in negotiations with the BSC over manning levels for the No. 3 blast furnace which was then under construction. This furnace, the first of a new design of furnace in the UK, was also considerably larger than anything else in the country with a planned output of 5,000 tons/day. That compared to outputs of 1,200 tons/day for each of the existing, No.s 1 & 2, pretty typical of similar 'modern' furnaces at other British works. Not only was this furnace able to produce considerably more iron, it was largely automated requiring fewer operatives. The union were keen to protect jobs and were demanding manning levels higher than the BSC thought necessary. The new furnace was also going to more than double the ore requirement at the works, all by then imported via Port Talbot, and new handling arrangements were installed in preparation, including the new rail service. The new ore handling plant, despite it's much greater output, required fewer operatives for the three furnaces than did the old for two. Most of the men involved in these processes would have been members of the N.U.B. and I SUSPECT, I don't know, that the dispute over the handling of the new ore trains was all part of the ongoing wrangling over how many operatives the new plant should employ. Happy to be put right if somebody knows the actual reason. Sounds credible, Arthur. IIRC, the ore from Newport Docks had been delivered in hopper wagons. These would have been split into small groups, shunted over the unloading pit, where the doors would be opened manually, the ore moved to the stockpile, and then the doors closed manually. In comparison, with the rotary tipplers, it was simply a case of run round, propel the train through the tippler, inverting each wagon in turn, then return the empty train to Port Talbot. That would probably have meant the loss of at least half-a-dozen jobs per shift; even if they weren't NUB members, they would have been members of another union affiliated to the Works Joint Commitee, and so the NUB would be obliged to support them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 I spent the week commencing 14th. May, 1979 skiving off from my then job with the local council, as I was to start a new job on 21st. May that would provide gainful employment for the following thirty years. . During that 'downtime' - on Tuesday 15th. May, 1979 I snapped (poorly) 37299+37304+37300 on an up loaded iron ore train entering Cardiff Central. . Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Downendian Posted January 23, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 23, 2015 Ahh those triple headed 37s - what a sight and sound they were. Thanks for the photo Brian. Neil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianwales Posted January 24, 2015 Author Share Posted January 24, 2015 HI Thanks everyone for the info. Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffP Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Never fails to amaze me how empty the ore wagons are...they are rarely more than 1/4 full, due to the density of the ore. There seems to be less ore in the Immingham>High Santon ore trains now with a class 66 in charge than when they had a 60. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Never fails to amaze me how empty the ore wagons are...they are rarely more than 1/4 full, due to the density of the ore. There seems to be less ore in the Immingham>High Santon ore trains now with a class 66 in charge than when they had a 60. It is surprising how little ore is needed to load the wagons to capacity, most especially with some of the very fine imported ores; compare these to shots of workings from High Dyke, where the wagons were loaded well above the sides. In one of the books about modelling wagons, I think by Geoff Kent, there is a photo taken from a high viewpoint of wagons being loaded at Immingham in the 1950s. The wagons are a real mixture, ranging from 5 and 7 plank minerals to purpose built ore wagons, but the thing that is most noiceable is how little ore there seems to be in the wagons. In some of the wooden-bodied wagons, it almost looks as though someone's forgotten to clean them out after unloading. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The British ores being loaded in the '50s and 60's were very lean, i.e. they had a low iron content, less than 50%, those from the Frodingham area being less than 25%. There was minimal, usually no, treatment at the quarries so the ores being transported were relatively light, hence the piled wagons. On the other hand, the imported ores had much higher iron content, which is why they were imported in the first place, and most had/have some treatment or 'benefication' carried out at the point of extraction. There's no point in shipping 100,000 tons of ore from Australia if only 50,000 tons of it is iron. So, imported ores are denser and are often treated to improve the iron content/remove the dross e.g. pelletisation, they're very heavy so consequently the wagons look empty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivercider Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The British ores being loaded in the '50s and 60's were very lean, i.e. they had a low iron content, less than 50%, those from the Frodingham area being less than 25%. There was minimal, usually no, treatment at the quarries so the ores being transported were relatively light, hence the piled wagons. On the other hand, the imported ores had much higher iron content, which is why they were imported in the first place, and most had/have some treatment or 'benefication' carried out at the point of extraction. There's no point in shipping 100,000 tons of ore from Australia if only 50,000 tons of it is iron. So, imported ores are denser and are often treated to improve the iron content/remove the dross e.g. pelletisation, they're very heavy so consequently the wagons look empty. I remember walking around some of the sidings at Newport, around 1979, with my dad, particularly Mon Bank I think it was called and remember clearly the ballast being covered with iron ore pellets, not the clearest picture but here is a loaded set 56035 and 56044 approach Ebbw JUnction Newport with a loaded ore set, 19/5/82 cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattydude Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Some interesting workings also occurred when either 2 cl 56's werent available or 3 cl 37's, so a combination of each working in tandem with two drivers occured many times. I attached a few photos here. All taken at my home town then of llanharan back in 1981/2. Ian W. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 ... all of which begs the question of how such traffic would have been handled by steam, or if it could have been handled at all? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.