Private owner furniture containers

[Michael Hodgson]

20 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

These two containers seem to be of similar construction, with diagonal boarding. Evidently an established concept by the late 1890s.

 

This would presumably be to act as bracing, reinforing the container frame and stop it from distorting if the load shifted when wagons got shunted.

[uax6]

22 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Continuing to think about this (sorry), it seems not unreasonable to take the LMS-built containers as a point of reference.these came in all shapes and sizes but type K was specifically for furniture traffic:

 

 

[Embedded link to Warwickshire Railways lnwrcs2124, dated 3 Feb 1932.]

 

These were 15' 2.25" long x 6' 10.5" wide over body x 7' 10.5" tall overall, with doors at one end only. These are larger dimensions than we've been estimating for the pre-grouping examples but were presumably a size the removals trade could handle by the early 1930s. K37 was one of a batch of 99 built at Earlestown in 1932, so if the date given for the photo is correct, it hasn't been in traffic long but has already got a bit scruffy. [Ref. R.J. Essery, LMS Wagons Vol. 2, fig. 111.]

 

Perhaps the most relevant information is that they had a carrying capacity of 3 tons and a tare weight of 1-9-2; a smaller container would be a bit less but by choosing to model a wagon with container, you are committing yourself to equipping Netherport with a crane of 5 tons capacity or to modelling a traffic drepartment travelling crane of that capacity.

 

The interesting part of the above is that it shows that the crane is choked (I'm sure that there is actually a proper name for it!) as it cannot lift the container any higher, and that the container is only just off the floor of the wagon (maybe not even off the floor at the front corner. This might not be a game stopper in this instance, as the wagon is a drop sider, although the corner posts <might> stop it coming out easily. I believe its a staged image, taken to show why the choice of wagon that they get loaded on really does matter. 

Other interesting details are that the rail clips on the crane are not in use (again suggesting that it is staged), and the use of rubble to chock the wheels of the crane, as it appears to be unbraked. The container also appears to be very close to the jib of the crane, which again could make handling interesting.

 

Andy G

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, uax6 said:

The interesting part

 

An interesting part! Another is that the crane wagon has been converted from dumb buffers. It is evidently of some antiquity; I'm not sure if it is LNWR or Midland in origin but if the latter, 1870s at latest, I think.

 

As you say, it's a posed photo, so I'm not sure you should read too much into the position of the crane.

Edited March 15, 2023 by Compound2632

[apl31]

Regarding the Liverpool connection, in “The Coniston Railway”  (Andrews and Holme published by the Cumbrian Railways Association ) There is a photo of 2 containers belonging to what looks like “Spencer & Brown Liverpool”. Based on the loco hauling them, it must date after 1911 but probably before grouping.  

[Edwardian]

Familiarty with GWR practice may help to set some parameters here. Until the introduction of dedicated Conflat wagons in the 1930s, containers had to use other available types and that seems to have limited the size of containers. 

 

If one looks at the dimensions of the GWR's own containers, those built in the late '20s and early '30s are between 13' 9 1/2" and 14' 4 1/2" long. Those built after the advent of the H6 Conflat (1933) are either 15' 2 1/2" or 16'. The Conflats had a bed measuring 16' 7  1/2" between end baulks. 

 

So, this I offer as an example that illustrates Compound's point that the dimensions had to conform with the wagons of the day. In the case of the GWR, pre-Conflat, it frequently employed its shorter Match trucks, themselves cut down from standard 15'6" wagons, so any container built by the GWR prior to 1934 needed to fit such a wagon bed.

 

Interesteringly in 1936 the GWR acquired some second-hand containers with diagonal planking for use with Bristol traffic. As non-GWR builds, I cannot find measurements.

 

I do wonder if the ultimate answer is to track down the restored example posted by Phil Sutters and go armed with a tape measure.   

[magmouse]

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Familiarty with GWR practice may help to set some parameters here. Until the introduction of dedicated Conflat wagons in the 1930s, containers had to use other available types and that seems to have limited the size of containers. 

 

If one looks at the dimensions of the GWR's own containers, those built in the late '20s and early '30s are between 13' 9 1/2" and 14' 4 1/2" long. Those built after the advent of the H6 Conflat (1933) are either 15' 2 1/2" or 16'. The Conflats had a bed measuring 16' 7  1/2" between end baulks. 

 

So, this I offer as an example that illustrates Compound's point that the dimensions had to conform with the wagons of the day. In the case of the GWR, pre-Conflat, it frequently employed its shorter Match trucks, themselves cut down from standard 15'6" wagons, so any container built by the GWR prior to 1934 needed to fit such a wagon bed.

 

Interesteringly in 1936 the GWR acquired some second-hand containers with diagonal planking for use with Bristol traffic. As non-GWR builds, I cannot find measurements.

 

I do wonder if the ultimate answer is to track down the restored example posted by Phil Sutters and go armed with a tape measure.   

 

Thanks - yes, all that makes sense, building on @Compound2632's observations. As you say, measuring an actual example would be the answer (assuming it is the right period), though as my model will be for a fictitious removals company, I think I will be happy with something that convincing in its measurements, construction and livery, without needing it to be an exact copy of a specific type.

 

This is probably a good moment to say a big 'thank you' to all who have contributed to this thread. It's been another fascinating descent of yet another rabbit hole of railway history.

 

And to show it doesn't (necessarily) have to end here, I offer this delight, with matching containers and pantechnicons:

 

http://phils-pba-hstry.com/archer-cowley--co/archer-cowley--co-photo/archer-cowley--co-history/acco-containers-on-railway.html

 

 

Nick.

[Nearholmer]

I’d concur with Compound’s point about the containers being double-sheathed with boards at ninety degrees; it was a standard technique for constructing things that might need to withstand “sway” loads, such as might occur if a container got bumped on one corner or edge during handling. You will sometimes see old sheds at windy seaside places made like this to resist storm damage too, and I think one boat-building technique uses it.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Nearholmer

[magmouse]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

I’d concur with Compound’s point about the containers being double-sheathed with boards at ninety degrees; it was a standard technique for constructing things that might need to withstand “sway” loads, such as might occur if a container got bumped on one corner or edge during handling. You will sometimes see old sheds at windy seaside places made like this to resist storm damage too, and I think one boat-building technique uses it.

 

 

That makes sense. It presumably also minimises the amount of structural framing, inside or out, which would reduce the available volume, given the need to fit inside an ordinary low or medium sided open wagon. Internal framing, etc., would also risk damage to relatively delicate loads such as furniture.

 

Nick.

[Johann Marsbar]

Frasers of Ipswich certainly had their own containers for shipping furniture and one was featured loaded on a steam lorry on their enamel advertising signs.....

 

 

Mainline Railways did an OO version of that container mounted on a 1 plank wagon many years ago, which was somewhat better than the Matchbox Model of Yesteryear version of the featured steam lorry and trailer about the same time that managed to change the appearance considerably to fit in with the model they were already producing.  The container became the wooden sided rear part of the lorry with a canvas tilt - as did the trailer!

 

[Compound2632]

Open your copy of LNWR Wagons Vol. 1 at p. 59 and say: "That's not a furniture pantechnicon, it's a furniture container, for all that it says Manchester Pantechnicon on the side". [Credited as Real Photographs (C9122).] 

 

This one has horizontal boarding with two ribs lengthways and projecting lifting hoops low down, rather than diagonal straps to lifting points at the eves as we've seen on some others. It does give the best view of end door ironwork I've yet seen. It's sitting in a LNWR D1 1-plank wagon, at Shallcross, Cromford & High Peak; scaling from the wagon, it might be about 14' 6" long. There's a group of railwaymen in the photo; the look of them is more Victorian than Edwardian to my eye so I wonder if this container represents an earlier form of construction.

 

Edit: found it.

https://lnwrs.zenfolio.com/p148651598/e792970bb

Edited March 15, 2023 by Compound2632

[magmouse]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

It does give the best view of end door ironwork I've yet seen.

 

Noting that it seems to be a simpler arrangement, with no drop-down bottom section, than most other designs we have been looking at.

 

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I wonder if this container represents an earlier form of construction.

 

I had the same thought. The types with high-level lifting points also seem to travel with cables and a central lifting ring permanently attached, which feels like the sort of development that would come later, as volumes of traffic increased and the need for simple and rapid loading and unloading grew.

 

Nick.

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, Johann Marsbar said:

Frasers of Ipswich certainly had their own containers for shipping furniture and one was featured loaded on a steam lorry on their enamel advertising signs.....

 

 

Mainline Railways did an OO version of that container mounted on a 1 plank wagon many years ago, which was somewhat better than the Matchbox Model of Yesteryear version of the featured steam lorry and trailer about the same time that managed to change the appearance considerably to fit in with the model they were already producing.  The container became the wooden sided rear part of the lorry with a canvas tilt - as did the trailer!

 

 

Ah, getting close to Norfolk now!

[Compound2632]

Adrian Marks has sent me this photo, taken on 29 April 1911 at Brentwood, Essex, on the Colchester main line out of Liverpool Street - Basilica Fields territory:

 

Adrian provides a commentary:

 

The leading vehicle looks like an LNWR furniture wagon to Dia.38, and is carrying a scotched and roped furniture van belonging to T. Inglesant & Sons Ltd of Leicester which bears the royal arms. There's obviously no need to describe the Midland wagon to you, which is carrying a lift van, also belonging to Inglesant.

The company was founded in 1872 by Thomas Inglesant, who, at the time the photograph was taken, was in the final year of his life. By then, the company was in the hands of his sons, Thomas Henry (Chairman and Managing Director) and John Herbert, and were, in their own words, cabinet makers & upholsterers, house furnishers, carpet warehousemen, and furniture removers.

The economic difficulties between World Wars prompted the usual tale of business decline, rebranding, and further decline, until finally sold to by Waring & Gillow (a company with a rabbit hole of history in its own right to anyone interested in antique furniture of the Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian periods - id est, my better half) after both brothers had passed.

I like photographs that challenge our often entrenched views about how the railways operated and looked in the late Victorian and Edwardian periods. Had I two furniture vans from a company outside the GER's natural catchment, I'd almost certainly have put them on a pair of
wagons from a single foreign railway, but now I have to worry about how this came to be, and whether it was reasonably typical, or an uncommon event caught by chance.

The Inglesant furniture van looks tolerably clean, just a haze of traffic dust around the gills, but everything else from the locomotive (a rebuilt T19 2-4-0) down is desperately grimy, including the lavishly decorated lift van. So much for being a mobile advertisement; another few hundred miles and the signwriter's art will be almost completely obliterated.

 

(I note Adian's use of the term "lift van" for what we've been calling a container.)

 

I replied:

 

Of course it was the Midland wagon that caught my eye. There's just enough of the V-hanger visible for one to see that this is one with the simple Morton clutch on both sides - we're looking at the non-brake side and can see that the vee hanger is mounted behind the solebar and the lever is to the left. Lots 631 or 636, built 1905-07.

 

Neither the pantechnicon nor the container show any signs of boarding, either horizontal of diagonal, which suggests either a high degree of finish or a panel construction.

 

Presumably this shipment originated somewhere in the Leicester area. The choice of wagons is interesting. I'm wondering if the 1908 LNWR/LYR/MR agreement (about which I really need to learn more), whilst not making wagons common user between the companies, at least made shared use easier to arrange.

Edited March 17, 2023 by Compound2632

[magmouse]

26 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Adrian Marks has sent me this photo, taken on 29 April 1911 at Brentwood, Essex, on the Colchester main line out of Liverpool Street - Basilica Fields territory:

 

Adrian provides a commentary:

 

The leading vehicle looks like an LNWR furniture wagon to Dia.38, and is carrying a scotched and roped furniture van belonging to T. Inglesant & Sons Ltd of Leicester which bears the royal arms. There's obviously no need to describe the Midland wagon to you, which is carrying a lift van, also belonging to Inglesant.

The company was founded in 1872 by Thomas Inglesant, who, at the time the photograph was taken, was in the final year of his life. By then, the company was in the hands of his sons, Thomas Henry (Chairman and Managing Director) and John Herbert, and were, in their own words, cabinet makers & upholsterers, house furnishers, carpet warehousemen, and furniture removers.

The economic difficulties between World Wars prompted the usual tale of business decline, rebranding, and further decline, until finally sold to by Waring & Gillow (a company with a rabbit hole of history in its own right to anyone interested in antique furniture of the Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian periods - id est, my better half) after both brothers had passed.

I like photographs that challenge our often entrenched views about how the railways operated and looked in the late Victorian and Edwardian periods. Had I two furniture vans from a company outside the GER's natural catchment, I'd almost certainly have put them on a pair of
wagons from a single foreign railway, but now I have to worry about how this came to be, and whether it was reasonably typical, or an uncommon event caught by chance.

The Inglesant furniture van looks tolerably clean, just a haze of traffic dust around the gills, but everything else from the locomotive (a rebuilt T19 2-4-0) down is desperately grimy, including the lavishly decorated lift van. So much for being a mobile advertisement; another few hundred miles and the signwriter's art will be almost completely obliterated.

 

(I note Adian's use of the term "lift van" for what we've been calling a container.)

 

I replied:

 

Of course it was the Midland wagon that caught my eye. There's just enough of the V-hanger visible for one to see that this is one with the simple Morton clutch on both sides - we're looking at the non-brake side and can see that the vee hanger is mounted behind the solebar and the lever is to the left. Lots 631 or 636, built 1905-07.

 

Neither the pantechnicon nor the container show any signs of boarding, either horizontal of diagonal, which suggests either a high degree of finish or a panel construction.

 

Presumably this shipment originated somewhere in the Leicester area. The choice of wagons is interesting. I'm wondering if the 1908 LNWR/LYR/MR agreement (about which I really need to learn more), whilst not making wagons common user between the companies, at least made shared use easier to arrange.

 

Thank you (and Adrian) for that - most useful! The lift van / container is interesting, as noted, in having panelled sides, similar to the Pantechnicon branded example on the LNWR 1-planker, referred to earlier in the thread. I suspect this is an earlier design, with the double-layer diagonal boarding being an improved version with less/no obstructing internal framework. Even so, this one has the metal strips running at an angle up the sides to the permanently fixed lifting gear on the roof, transferring the load from the floor structure upwards - unlike the Pantechnicon type with lifting points low on the sides.

 

The view of the pantechnicon (small 'p') on the truck is also really helpful, as I have plans for one of these, in matching livery to the container I will be making. As seen here, I want a container on a normal open (GWR 1-plank in my case) plus a pantechnicon on a special vehicle (probably the Scorpio kit for a GWR diagram G9 Serpent). I have found lots of pictures of pantechnicons, but they generally show them on the road, not loaded, and seeing details of how they were chocked, roped, etc., is difficult. This photo helps with that.

 

The comments about levels of dirt are interesting too - something we have discussed before. I note the MR 3-planker looks fairly grubby, and with no hint of shine, but the letter R still pops out of the picture! As does the painted lettering on the solebar - is there any suggestion that just lettering was repainted? Or perhaps it is a quirk of the photographic and/or subsequent digitisation process.

 

Nick.

 

[Compound2632]

11 minutes ago, magmouse said:

I note the MR 3-planker looks fairly grubby, and with no hint of shine, but the letter R still pops out of the picture! As does the painted lettering on the solebar - is there any suggestion that just lettering was repainted? Or perhaps it is a quirk of the photographic and/or subsequent digitisation process.

 

Adrian had noticed that too, attributing it to the semi-mythical oxalic paint.

 

The lettering on the solebar at the edge of the photo will be the tare weight.

[Caley Jim]

31 minutes ago, magmouse said:

The view of the pantechnicon (small 'p') on the truck is also really helpful, as I have plans for one of these, in matching livery to the container I will be making

I understand it was standard practice for the shafts to be removed and placed under the pantechnicon on the floor of the wagon for transport.

 

Jim

 

 

[WFPettigrew]

On 15/03/2023 at 08:21, apl31 said:

Regarding the Liverpool connection, in “The Coniston Railway”  (Andrews and Holme published by the Cumbrian Railways Association ) There is a photo of 2 containers belonging to what looks like “Spencer & Brown Liverpool”. Based on the loco hauling them, it must date after 1911 but probably before grouping.  

 

Thanks yes it was a distant memory that someone on here had provided more info about the owner of those containers which featured in that photo at Woodland station.

 

I think the firm is actually Spencer Bros - of 50-52 Brownlow Street says Gores Directory of 1900 (online via the Uni of Leicester).

 

I would be wary of dating the photo from when the Sharpie was rebuilt into that form if your source is the sadly widely discredited Rush books? (Rush says 1911 for that rebuild.)  It's certainly 20th century, with 4-4-0 No 125 also in shot and both locomotives still have the LNWR style lamp sockets, which the FR used up until shortly before the grouping (circa 1920 onwards) when they switched to the prong type, I presume as a standardisation move to get ready for the Grouping. So sometime between 1910ish and 1920?

 

All the best

 

Neil 

 

 

 

 

[apl31]

Thanks for the information. I had assumed the partially visible “Brown” was part of the company name not the address.

So the 3 lines of marking on end must be something like:

SPENCER [BROS.]?

[BROWNLOW ST(REET)]?

LIVERPOOL

On the sides (2 lines):

SPENCER BROS

LIVERPOOL

You are correct my date was assumed from Mr Rush’s book.

Aidan

[WFPettigrew]

1 hour ago, apl31 said:

Thanks for the information. I had assumed the partially visible “Brown” was part of the company name not the address.

So the 3 lines of marking on end must be something like:

SPENCER [BROS.]?

[BROWNLOW ST(REET)]?

LIVERPOOL

On the sides (2 lines):

SPENCER BROS

LIVERPOOL

You are correct my date was assumed from Mr Rush’s book.

Aidan

Thanks Aidan, yes I agree it was something like that - the BROS might have had to be Bros or some other squashed variant to fit it into the space on the end.   
 

Given the evidence of multiple containers in a single train, I strongly suspect that the second wagon is also a Spencer Bros container, and it's interesting to see that it appears from the half a letter visible (!) to have:

 

SPENCER BROS 
LIVERPOOL

 

across the end (no Brownlow St) although there is a letter above the S for Spencer which might be a B for Brownlow St but might also be an R for REMOVALS - I have a hunch this was written on a curve parallel with the roof?

 

I am trying to track down an original copy of this and if I do, and it is clearer, I will post more detail then. 

 

All the best

 

Neil 

[apl31]

Neil, 

Thanks for the reply. 

Hopefully you can track original, you probably already checked with CRA its not part of their collection/property.

The second wagon is probably not a container maybe a  pantechnicon. I agree it could be R in the end curve above SPENCER.  On the side the top line partially visible seems to end BROS.

Aidan

[Jol Wilkinson]

On 17/03/2023 at 20:44, Compound2632 said:

Adrian Marks has sent me this photo, taken on 29 April 1911 at Brentwood, Essex, on the Colchester main line out of Liverpool Street - Basilica Fields territory:

 

Adrian provides a commentary:

 

The leading vehicle looks like an LNWR furniture wagon to Dia.38, and is carrying a scotched and roped furniture van belonging to T. Inglesant & Sons Ltd of Leicester which bears the royal arms. There's obviously no need to describe the Midland wagon to you, which is carrying a lift van, also belonging to Inglesant.

The company was founded in 1872 by Thomas Inglesant, who, at the time the photograph was taken, was in the final year of his life. By then, the company was in the hands of his sons, Thomas Henry (Chairman and Managing Director) and John Herbert, and were, in their own words, cabinet makers & upholsterers, house furnishers, carpet warehousemen, and furniture removers.

The economic difficulties between World Wars prompted the usual tale of business decline, rebranding, and further decline, until finally sold to by Waring & Gillow (a company with a rabbit hole of history in its own right to anyone interested in antique furniture of the Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian periods - id est, my better half) after both brothers had passed.

I like photographs that challenge our often entrenched views about how the railways operated and looked in the late Victorian and Edwardian periods. Had I two furniture vans from a company outside the GER's natural catchment, I'd almost certainly have put them on a pair of
wagons from a single foreign railway, but now I have to worry about how this came to be, and whether it was reasonably typical, or an uncommon event caught by chance.

The Inglesant furniture van looks tolerably clean, just a haze of traffic dust around the gills, but everything else from the locomotive (a rebuilt T19 2-4-0) down is desperately grimy, including the lavishly decorated lift van. So much for being a mobile advertisement; another few hundred miles and the signwriter's art will be almost completely obliterated.

 

(I note Adian's use of the term "lift van" for what we've been calling a container.)

 

I replied:

 

Of course it was the Midland wagon that caught my eye. There's just enough of the V-hanger visible for one to see that this is one with the simple Morton clutch on both sides - we're looking at the non-brake side and can see that the vee hanger is mounted behind the solebar and the lever is to the left. Lots 631 or 636, built 1905-07.

 

Neither the pantechnicon nor the container show any signs of boarding, either horizontal of diagonal, which suggests either a high degree of finish or a panel construction.

 

Presumably this shipment originated somewhere in the Leicester area. The choice of wagons is interesting. I'm wondering if the 1908 LNWR/LYR/MR agreement (about which I really need to learn more), whilst not making wagons common user between the companies, at least made shared use easier to arrange.

A useful picture of a LNWR D38 Furniture Van wagon. I have become involved in the development of a 4mm kit for this wagon and while I have the details, drawings and photos in the LNWR Wagons book, this is the first photo of one in service that I have seen.

[Penlan]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 I have become involved in the development of a 4mm kit for this wagon and while I have the details, drawings and photos in the LNWR Wagons book, this is the first photo of one in service that I have seen.

Oh, that looks like I can be rid of my GWR Hydra (Transport from PZ) and (eventually) have the furniture van going home from The LNWR's Swansea Area on a Premier wagon 😎
..... and more scale like chains etc.,
PS - this is in the fiddle yard, I need all the help I can get putting on/taking off things on the track.
 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Penlan

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Penlan said:

Oh, that looks like I can be rid of my GWR Hydra (Transport from PZ) and (eventually) have the furniture van going home from The LNWR's Swansea Area on a Premier wagon 😎
..... and more scale like chains etc.,
PS - this is in the fiddle yard, I need all the help I can get putting on/taking off things on the track.
 

 

Shame on you!

[WFPettigrew]

Hi All  

 

Sorry this has taken a while, but I do now have a copy of the image of the train at Woodland on the FR's Coniston branch to share with you.

 

This is shared here with permission of the CRA, but it is a copyright image - credit Cumbrian Railways Association - Ken Norman collection.

 

For those of us who know the book, this is a much better resolution rendition.  But although now amongst other things the pantechnicon on the second wagon is clearer, other than supporting my earlier idea that the top row of lettering on the end is on an arc, to follow the roofline, I still have no idea what it might have said, given the only visible "letter" doesn't really look like a letter!?!   Any thoughts?

 

And any other observations?  There are no obvious clues as to the parentage of the 1 plank with the container on it?

 

All the best

 

Neil 

[Caley Jim]

My guess would be that it says the same as  on the side 'Spencer Bros'.  That definitely looks like the LHS of a 'B' to me!   What else is it likely to be?

 

Jim