Transit of specialised wagonload freight between pre-grouping railway companies before 1916

[rodent279]

Slightly OT, but not far off-were BR CCT's (the MK1 derived 4 wheel version) used for carrying cars? If so, how much, and for how long? They seem to have been in parcels use from at least the early 70's.

And I wonder if anyone has tried to model one with end doors open and cars in the process of loading?

(I know the bogie version, GUV, was used for car traffic, I remember seeing them on the end of the Stranny, the infamous Stranraer-Euston, back in the late 80's. Notorious for late running, if it was 30 min down it was considered on time!)

[Morello Cherry]

There is often discussion about inspiration for modellers, because to me, those images of the Derby show are really inspirational. Even if you didn't model the prototype, the concept of temporary sidings/platforms for a major agricultural show has loads of potential.

 

You have rolling stock from across the country. A Highland vehicle (?) next to GWR vehicles (I am wondering how many other locations that would crop up? Plenty of specials from across the country. Lots of interesting things being moved to the show and plenty of interesting things to have as scenery. What more do you need?

 

I just came across this for the 1879 show in London. It shows the wind powered pumps and if you like traction engines...

 

 

To get a sense of the scale:

 

Quote

The 100 acre site was chosen for its proximity to the railway network, Queen’s Park Station having opened on 2 June 1879 on the main line from London to Birmingham, just in time to facilitate the movement of heavy machinery and stock.

By the 1870s the annual shows had become major events and the Kilburn show was to be the largest every held. It saw an entry of 11,878 implements, 2879 livestock entries and over 187,000 visitors.

https://www.theundergroundmap.com/index.html?id=3367

 

Quite clearly, unless you are Rod Stewart or Pete Waterman, you probably aren't going to be able to model it in all its glory but you could certain use the idea of a regional show which would probably still attract traffic from outside the region and as we can see traffic to those types of shows lasts until the 1960s.

[Nearholmer]

The weather looks a bit unhelpful in that case. Modelling a lot of damp and muddy Victorians would certainly be different from the norm.

 

These shows were well ‘written up’ too, so no shortage of information about what was on display, and for some things like the layout plans survive.

[jim.snowdon]

On 02/08/2022 at 12:35, Compound2632 said:

 

Looks possible. No doubt that dates from 1888, the year in which Prize Cattle Vans became a thing as a result of lobbying of the RCH General Managers' Conference by the various Agricultural Societies of Great Britain.

Presumably before then these animals travelled round in horse boxes? Or did they travel much at all?

[jim.snowdon]

11 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Slightly OT, but not far off-were BR CCT's (the MK1 derived 4 wheel version) used for carrying cars? If so, how much, and for how long? They seem to have been in parcels use from at least the early 70's.

And I wonder if anyone has tried to model one with end doors open and cars in the process of loading?

(I know the bogie version, GUV, was used for car traffic, I remember seeing them on the end of the Stranny, the infamous Stranraer-Euston, back in the late 80's. Notorious for late running, if it was 30 min down it was considered on time!)

A good question, to which I have a suspicion that the answer is no.  The railways, though, were good at building more of whatever had gone before, and all four of the pre-BR railway companies had built a good many CCTs. I wonder if their real value became one of usefulness in carrying long loads that required protection but could not be fitted through the side doors of a conventional goods van. Theatrical scenery is a well known example and the BR GUV could be looked on as a modern scenery van in addition to its roles in carrying parcels and newspapers. They were into middle age before they were used to replace flat wagons on Motorail traffic.

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

Presumably before then these animals travelled round in horse boxes? Or did they travel much at all?

 

From an article by John Watling on the Great Eastern Railway Society website:

 

"Until the mid 1880’s cattle conveyed by train either travelled in cattle wagons, attached to goods trains, or in horse boxes. For valuable breeding animals the horse box was the favoured method but they were expensive vehicles to build and maintain and accordingly rates for their use were high. On the other hand the cattle wagon was a rather basic vehicle in which to entrust a prize beast and its journey was usually slow and liable to long delays. In 1888 the railway companies were collectively approached by representatives of agricultural and other societies asking that either a new type of vehicle should be constructed, to be called a cattle box, designed to run at passenger train speeds, or that the existing cattle wagons should be improved and permitted to be attached to passenger trains."

 

(The 1888 date should be corrected to 1887, the RCH General Managers' Conference that made the recommendation that companies should privide special vehicles for this traffic was on 4 August in that year. Of course the first prize cattle vans did not appear until the following year.)

[47137]

As OP I have gone quiet because this thread is giving me  ideas but I don't have fresh prototype information to add.

 

Slightly OT, but it occurs to me an agricultural show would need some additional passenger services too. Could be a really nice 'special day' on a layout.

 

- Richard.

[Morello Cherry]

You might find this account of Trumpington Station near Cambridge which was a temporary station for the 1922 Royal Agricultural Show interesting. A wealth of information. A station that existed for a mere 4 days.

 

http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/t/trumpington/

 

There are some shots of passenger trains which might give you some ideas for suitable rolling stock.

[tomparryharry]

The railways were 'common carriers' and as such, carried everything.  If the client wanted it, then the railways carried it. The chances are quite high that just about everything has a precedent. Out of gauge loads, and wrong line working & occupation always interest me. 

 

I've got a photo here, of a Hull & Barnsley wagon on the  staithes at Hereford Loco. Plus, of course, remember that there used to be companies hiring out wagons, rather like we hire vehicles today.

[Compound2632]

On 14/08/2022 at 17:05, tomparryharry said:

I've got a photo here, of a Hull & Barnsley wagon on the  staithes at Hereford Loco. 

 

What date? if post-Great War, with pooling, that would be nothing out of the ordinary.

[phil_sutters]

On 03/08/2022 at 19:50, Compound2632 said:

 

In 1888 the railway companies were collectively approached by representatives of agricultural and other societies asking that either a new type of vehicle should be constructed, to be called a cattle box, designed to run at passenger train speeds, or that the existing cattle wagons should be improved and permitted to be attached to passenger trains."

 

The history of the Bath & West Show says quite specifically - 'This would have been impossible before the construction of a railway network, to bring people, stock and machinery to the Show.'

The Great Eastern built extra platforms for an agricultural show at Norwich -  https://www.gersociety.org.uk/index.php/gallery/royal-agricultural-show

Edited August 21, 2022 by phil_sutters

[The Stationmaster]

The Act  in fact required the railways and canals  to 'afford (i.e. provide) all reasonable facilities for the receiving and delivering of traffic'.  The Act therefore included provisions for a test of reasonableness via the legal system and it was up to the railway, or canal, to prove that it had provided 'all reasonable facilities'.  

 

The Handbook Of Stations reflected the reality of this by noting the classes of traffic which every station (passenger, or goods/both, or public siding) could deal with and not all stations  etc had facilities to handle all classes of traffic hence a Common Carrier obligation for certain classes of traffic could not be met at every station etc.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

The Act  in fact required the railways and canals  to 'afford (i.e. provide) all reasonable facilities for the receiving and delivering of traffic'.  The Act therefore included provisions for a test of reasonableness via the legal system and it was up to the railway, or canal, to prove that it had provided 'all reasonable facilities'.  

 

I came across an interesting instance of arrangements for handling unusual traffic recently, in the MR Carriage & Wagon Committee minutes:

 

13 August 1908

4844      Fittings for wagons for the conveyance of heavy guns.

               Read minute no. 35186 of the Traffic Committee as follows:-

               “The General Manager reported an arrangement come to by the principal Railway Companies with the Admiralty Authorities under which six sets of trucks and fittings suitable for the conveyance of 65-ton guns will, on three days’ notice, be available for use by the Department in case of emergency for the conveyance of such guns by the Companies’ railways subject to certain conditions including the obligation to pay a retaining fee of £20 per set of vehicles and fittings per annum.

               “Under the arrangement the Midland company are to find two sets of vehicles. One of these sets is already supplied with suitable fittings, but the other is not. It was, therefore, resolved that fittings be provide for the latter in accordance with the plan produced, at an estimated cost of £85, and the matter was referred to the Carriage and Wagon Committee.”

               Ordered

                              To be referred to the General Purposes Committee for approval.

 

The Midland providing two of the six sets reflects not only its dominance in the goods traffic field but also that the guns were made in Coventry and Sheffield and the warships built at Barrow and on the Tyne, so most guns would travel by the Midland much of the way. Of course these sets of vehicles were also used for non-emergency gun traffic.

Edited August 22, 2022 by Compound2632
sp.

[47137]

On 18/05/2022 at 15:24, 47137 said:

I am looking for excuses to include a better variety of wagons on my layout. Maybe some loads were transhipped part way on their journeys, and others were not.

 

I think we have identified some of the answers.

 

1) A load needing a special wagon, like a gun barrel

2) A load needing particular care, like a show animal

3) A load being awkward or laborious to tranship, like a ploughing engine

 

There ought to be others.

 

The load nagging in the back of my mind is an entire wagon filled with a product bound for a single destination. There must have been specialised loads like particular grades of coal or tar or timber, sourced in unique localities and finding markets far afield. I want to think, there were so many pre-grouping railway companies, then without through workings they would have spent more time doing transhipment than running trains . . . and of course, this gives me a justification for through workings on a layout.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, 47137 said:

 

I think we have identified some of the answers.

 

1) A load needing a special wagon, like a gun barrel

2) A load needing particular care, like a show animal

3) A load being awkward or laborious to tranship, like a ploughing engine

 

There ought to be others.

 

The load nagging in the back of my mind is an entire wagon filled with a product bound for a single destination. There must have been specialised loads like particular grades of coal or tar or timber, sourced in unique localities and finding markets far afield. I want to think, there were so many pre-grouping railway companies, then without through workings they would have spent more time doing transhipment than running trains . . . and of course, this gives me a justification for through workings on a layout.

 

I sympathise! Sticking with the pre-Great War, pre-pooling, scene, it remains the fact that in goods yards photos one sees very few "foreign" wagons, even in a big city yard - take a look at photos on the Warwickshire railways website of Birmingham yards: Lawley Street and Central (MR), Windsor street (LNWR), and Hockley (GWR) and compare the pre- and post-Great War scene.

 

Like you, I want to justify "foreign" wagons for my c. 1902 period. One way round this is to model something based on the Black Country entrepots such as Walsall or Dudley, served by all three companies at the same station (though each had its own goods station). That satisfies my need for MR, LNWR, and GWR wagons! From an accident report of the period, I have evidence for L&Y and CLC wagons being in MR goods trains in the area. I've justified NBR and G&SWR wagons in MR trains as these were the MR's Scottish partners; L&Y and CR wagons could plausibly turn up in LNWR goods trains. But these are at most ones or twos, both in prototype and modelling terms: foreigners should not dominate. I've recently built a couple of Carmbrian kits for Cambrian Railways wagons - these will have slate loads. Welsh slate could equally well come in LNWR wagons, possibly GWR.

[sulzer27jd]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I've justified NBR and G&SWR wagons in MR trains as these were the MR's Scottish partners; L&Y and CR wagons could plausibly turn up in LNWR goods trains. 

It is also not just the fact that you have foreign vehicles, it's the type of vehicle as well. A product being sent from a manufacturer to a customer would require transport and that could in theory lead to any railway's wagon being anywhere on the network. However there would need to be a justifiable (economic) reason why for an example a foundry casting from one end of the UK would need to pass many other, far more local foundries on its way to the customer. Of course there were reasons why a wagon or van might end up a long way from home but as modellers we should probably accept that there needs to be some kind of justification for it.

 

John

[Compound2632]

12 minutes ago, sulzer27jd said:

It is also not just the fact that you have foreign vehicles, it's the type of vehicle as well.

 

I should perhaps also have said that in my modelling for the Birmingham area c. 1902 I assiduously avoid special wagons, which were absolute rareties, and concentrate on the ordinary opens that formed the vast majority of the fleets of all companies, carrying the bulk of traffic of all types. That applies to my "foreigners" too.

[The Stationmaster]

Coal is relatively easy.  Different areas of the country produced different types of coal which in some cases suited different markets.  Thus pre-1914 the GWR was returning colliery empties from the London area via Banbury to collieries on the GCR and similarly empties for collieries served by the LNWR were exchanged in the Oxford area.  no doubt inter-company exchanges of colliery wagons to/from the GWR also took place in the West Midlands and probably north of Shrewsbury.

[Compound2632]

Just now, The Stationmaster said:

no doubt inter-company exchanges of colliery wagons to/from the GWR also took place in the West Midlands and probably north of Shrewsbury.

 

Bordesley was the location for exchange between the Midland and the Great Western, for everything from coal to royalty - in the latter case between Windsor and Chatsworth. Terry Essery, Firing Days at Saltley, describes working exchange traffic between Washwood Heath and Bordesley exchange sidings in the 1950s and also working through a Class A freight to the military depot at Long Marston with Saltley's best and smartest 8F as the motive power, to keep the Midland Division flag flying on the Western Region*.

 

*Important in this context to distinguish between the Western Region (ex-GWR) and Western Division (ex-LNWR).

[47137]

I have just bought myself a copy of Ian Allan's reprint of the 1904 RCH maps.

 

At first glance I realise so many small towns with more than one railway company had more than one station.

 

 

Looking at the railways in and around Rutland, I wonder how freight consuming a single wagon was sent from (say) Rockingham to Ketton. I am going to go back to the main topic,

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/159248-foreign-wagons-how-many-would-you-see/

I really do need to read it from end to end.

 

- Richard.

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, 47137 said:

Looking at the railways in and around Rutland, I wonder how freight consuming a single wagon was sent from (say) Rockingham to Ketton.

 

"The LNWR possessed running powers over the Midland between Luffenham and Stamford for all traffic." [Quote from here.]  So in a LNWR goods train throughout. Those maps only tell part of the story!

[47137]

This is very important to me. I was confusing 'joint' lines with 'running powers'. Thanks.

 

- Richard.

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, 47137 said:

This is very important to me. I was confusing 'joint' lines with 'running powers'. Thanks.

 

- Richard.

The list of Running Powers, and what they applied to (i.e. freight or coaching), was a separate section contained within the full bound volume of junction diagrams.  They were listed separately from joint lines and working arrangements but both were printed on pink paper in at least one of the editions.

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, The Stationmaster said:

The list of Running Powers, and what they applied to (i.e. freight or coaching), 

 

There's also the question of whether running powers were actually exercised or not, at various periods. Sometimes running powers were conceded as a means of diffusing opposition to a new railway by an existing one but never used. 

 

Back in the 19th century, both the Midland and the Great Northern exercised running powers for goods trains over the Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire, giving them both access to Manchester and the Cheshire Lines (a joint railway of those three companies) from South Yorkshire. In the 1890s the Midland built its own route, the Hope Valley line, and ceased to exercise its running powers over the Woodhead route. The Great Northern, which as far as Manchester was concerned was having its nose put seriously out of joint by the MS&L's London Extension, had got itself running powers over the new Midland route and switched its goods trains to it.

 

The MS&L / Great Central must have lost quite substantially by this, through the loss of income from the tolls paid for the Midland and GN goods trains. 

[Morello Cherry]

@Compound2632 - in theory you could have slate loads from LNWR, GWR and the Cambrian all originating from Blaenau Ffestiniog. (LNWR - BF via Llandudno Jnc, GWR via the Bala and Ffestiniog, and Cambrian via the Festiniog and the Cambrian via Minffordd). Although I'd assume that the LNWR would be the biggest carrier as it had Penrhyn and Dinorwic. Cambrian I guess would pick up Corris and TR slate as well.