RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted October 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Hi chaps, At Scaleforum I manage to pick up 15 Airfix cattle wagons for £2.06 each. I've now begun the task of researching different prototypes and variations of the different vehicles using MRJ articles and Geoff Kent's book, although there is one question I cannot for the life of my find an answer too. How many animals where transported in a vehicle at a time? I bought some Dartcastings cows, which prototypical I am told, by a well informed man, are the correct size. Say now in strong Westcountry accent! - So my lovers, how many of them Devon Reds should I's put in me wagons!? Kind regards in advance, Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted October 12, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 12, 2012 Don't know, but the carrying capacity of LMS Cattle wagons were 12 Ton. So you could work backwards from there, if you know the weight of your cattle. Not too many, I'd guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 It will depend on the breed, sex, age... Cattle were to be held firmly in place within the wagon - the moveable partition was used both to alter the revenue for the hire of the wagon, but also to ensure the cattle do not "go down". Other animals - pigs and sheep are loaded so that the drover should be able to push their way through them, they of course will move around more than cattle and settle down. Livestock traffic is very complex subject, I thought we had covered it fairly recently. Photographs showing loaded cattle wagons seem quite rare. Paul Bartlett Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted October 12, 2012 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Don't know, but the carrying capacity of LMS Cattle wagons were 12 Ton. So you could work backwards from there, if you know the weight of your cattle. Not too many, I'd guess. Hi Kevin, Well that was my thoughts to be honest. A South Devon Red cow weights between 900-1300 pounds, so working on that basis for a 8 Ton wagon 6 cows tops I would imagine? Regards, Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 As someone who never saw a cattle wagon with cattle aboard, my total knowledge on the loading is from one decent photo in Peter Tatlow's LNER wagon books of a GN large type with the partition set in the 'small' position. The cattle are the longhorn version, and there's seven of them for sure identifiable, pretty well constrained by the available floor area. I would guess that at need very small numbers might be put into the smaller space produced by the moveable partition? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted October 12, 2012 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Livestock traffic is very complex subject, I thought we had covered it fairly recently. Photographs showing loaded cattle wagons seem quite rare. I remember reading something Paul, but not about the number in a wagon, I might be mistaken mind! Regards, Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 ...A South Devon Red cow weights between 900-1300 pounds, so working on that basis for a 8 Ton wagon 6 cows tops I would imagine? Last time I looked, there were 2240 pounds in a ton*. Nick * though our transatlantic cousins, as is often the case, have a different idea... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 I remember reading something Paul, but not about the number in a wagon, I might be mistaken mind! Regards, Nick That is because it is unanswerable, except as with the answers already provided by myself and the others in this topic. One thing I've never understood was why BR cattle had two very distinctive loads - 8 and 12 tons, although the body designs are identical. The bearings will have varied (and probably some other features). As I've mentioned on several different topics I have a recollection of a loaded train at Edinburgh Waverley and the cattle were very close together. What seems more difficult is how a very few cattle were carried, less than the "small" area that could be partitioned off. There were tethering rings and perhaps these were used. The BR instructions don't make any mention of numbers in a load, nor how to deal with small numbers of cattle. Revenue was based on Small, Medium or Large areas of the wagon being used. Paul Bartlett Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted October 12, 2012 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Last time I looked, there were 2240 pounds in a ton*. Nick * though our transatlantic cousins, as is often the case, have a different idea... Yeah bearing in mind the size of the animal! Realistically I don't think (using the dart castings cow and a wagon) that any more than 6-7 would fit, before you end up with cows sitting on eachother! Thanks for your advice chaps, I'll go with the weight of the animal to the weight of the wagon. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 IIRC, I seem to remember if the animal had horns that they had to be loaded head to tail across the wagon, so that there was always a beast between the heads. If you get what I'm saying. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cary hill Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 IIRC, I seem to remember if the animal had horns that they had to be loaded head to tail across the wagon, so that there was always a beast between the heads. If you get what I'm saying. OzzyO. I've read that somewhere too, although the same thread also suggested that loading cattle head to tail in this fashion might be problem, as some of the stock would possibly have to walk backwards up the loading ramp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 IIRC, I seem to remember if the animal had horns that they had to be loaded head to tail across the wagon, so that there was always a beast between the heads. If you get what I'm saying. OzzyO. I've read that somewhere too, although the same thread also suggested that loading cattle head to tail in this fashion might be problem, as some of the stock would possibly have to walk backwards up the loading ramp. If the herdsman knew how many beast he could fit in to the wagon he would start loading the wagon from one end and turn the next beast so it was the other way around (this would be done in the wagon), then when he got to near the door start at the other end so the last beast in would be the right way around. IIRC the doors were about the same width as a beast is long or two beasts are wide and you can turn a beast in its own length. So no need to reverse one on if you got it right. You have to remember that these people did it day in and day out so it was all second nature to them. When they came to unload them the first beast would just be walked off and the rest would just follow. When this happened the beasts would be feed and watered, this had to happen after about six? hours As there was no provision of feed or water in the cattle wagons and a vet had to be on site to check over the beasts. I have read about a bad crossing from Ireland to Scotland where the vet would not let the beasts be moved on by rail for at least a full day as they were all suffering from sea sickness. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted October 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 French railway wagons (dating from the war era) actually had the information painted on them: Hommes 40 Chevaux 8. (which is of course horses not cows - not sure if same info on cattle wagons) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 ...When they came to unload them the first beast would just be walked off and the rest would just follow. When this happened the beasts would be feed and watered, this had to happen after about six? hours As there was no provision of feed or water in the cattle wagons and a vet had to be on site to check over the beasts. In Tim Bryan's All in a Day's Work: Life on the GWR, there is a section recalling shunters' and other staff recollections. This includes the following: At Cardiff...As well as being responsible for the unloading and loading of livestock, staff were required to water cattle en route from Ireland...This involved unloading cattle from the wagons, and, even if 10 had been driven out, there never seemed to be enough room to get them all back in! So the job could be done by railway staff rather than herdsmen and there may be a hint on wagon capacity there. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 ... One thing I've never understood was why BR cattle had two very distinctive loads - 8 and 12 tons, although the body designs are identical... Pretty sure that will derive from the smaller loading presented by movement of pigs, sheep, and other smaller stock in the same wagon. If it was roughly 10 large cattle capacity (seems reasonable given that the photo I referred to shows seven in two thirds the area, with the partition in the 'small' position) the lading could well be getting near the 10 ton mark, so a 12T capacity makes sense. But for sure, filling a cattle wagon with pigs or sheep would get nowhere near that load. Eighty sheep would be tight packed on the floor area, and at 150lbs a throw, that's still under six ton. ( I have a reasonable idea of the size of these things having recently helped get a bunch into a trailer.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagonman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 French railway wagons (dating from the war era) actually had the information painted on them: Hommes 40 Chevaux 8. (which is of course horses not cows - not sure if same info on cattle wagons) That was a somewhat larger vehicle... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagonman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Pretty sure that will derive from the smaller loading presented by movement of pigs, sheep, and other smaller stock in the same wagon. If it was roughly 10 large cattle capacity (seems reasonable given that the photo I referred to shows seven in two thirds the area, with the partition in the 'small' position) the lading could well be getting near the 10 ton mark, so a 12T capacity makes sense. But for sure, filling a cattle wagon with pigs or sheep would get nowhere near that load. Eighty sheep would be tight packed on the floor area, and at 150lbs a throw, that's still under six ton. ( I have a reasonable idea of the size of these things having recently helped get a bunch into a trailer.) Given that the average cow weighs about half a ton I don't think there was ever much danger of exceeding the 8 ton limit. I suspect it was more to do with standardising running gear components. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagonman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 We have had this topic before, perhaps on the previous incarnation of this forum, but we do seem to have more or less nailed it. The GWR General Appendix to the Rule Book has several pages devoted to the loading and transportation of livestock but nowhere does it give a maximum figure, presumably because of differences in the size of animals. It does talk of animals being separated by partitions under certain circumstances (2 cows each with unweaned calves was one example quoted), of feeding and watering, of milking lactating cows when in transit, of the need for bulls to be firmly tethered by their head or neck. There is also a dire warning about not allowing animals to be overcrowded, so it would seem that a loose pack is best. Another fascinating aside, and one I have never seen in any photo, is regarding shorn sheep: between 1 Nov and 30 April any sheep shorn within the last 60 days must be carried in trucks the sides of which have been covered by "tarpaulins or other suitable material in such a manner as to protect the sheep from the weather, without obstruction to proper ventilation". Sorry for the deviation... Richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Alder Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Attached is a picture of my cattle dock under construction, including what I used for inspiration,..."ahem". It is one of the very few images I have seen of this type of traffic, and may well help this discussion. Taken at Thurso, late fifties. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Worsdell forever Posted October 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 12, 2012 Although I've had no experience of loading railway cattle wagons, I've loaded this type of cattle trailer many times, it's 12' x 6'6" and we could get 7 fat beast in (modern Limousin cross/Hereford cross etc) , always a tight (ish) fit to stop them moving about and injuring themselves or damaging the vehicle (in one of these trailers cattle moving about too much could make it unstable). We also had partitions for less animals. Sheep were well and truly rammed (pun intended) in (there's quite a bit of give in wool) on two levels. With all animals the more you can get in the better value you get from your given transport, and yes I've been on a class 142 today between Darlington and Saltburn and know how the sheep feel... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 IIRC, at least one railway Co. had a sheep wagon, it looked like a cattle wagon but had two decks. H.R.? OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Is it possible that the different capacities allow for non-livestock (eg Cornish broccoli) loads? Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poggy1165 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I understood that the prime requirement was to stop the animals falling over, and thus they had to be pretty much crammed in. So if you cram the wagon with cattle you should be OK. As an aside, I think this is why odd animals destined for agricultural shows and the like, were usually if not invariably carried in special cattle wagons, which were more like horseboxes in terms of accommodation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 ...As an aside, I think this is why odd animals destined for agricultural shows and the like, were usually if not invariably carried in special cattle wagons, which were more like horseboxes in terms of accommodation. The special wagons, such as the GWR BEETLE, were intended for transporting highly prized and valuable beasts, not just any old animal, and attracted an appropriate hire cost. They also provided accommodation for an accompanying herdsman. The relevant section of the General Appendix to the Rule Book mentioned above by wagonman does mention the use of the partition for some cases but is generally more concerned with preventing overcrowding than with light loads. It also makes much of the need for battens on the floor to enable the animals to have a good foothold. On balance, I suspect that the partition might be used to confine a small number of animals. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingsignalman Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I remember an old signalman from Hooton North complaining about the cattle trains from Birkenhead to Banbury or York (40-odd wagons). By the time the train was passing Bromborough (the station before Hooton) it would be seen that an animal had fallen over. The train would be stopped at Hooton for the cattle wagon the animal was in to be detached and shunted over to the cattle pens so it could be emptied and the animal stood up. The fact the train usually ran along the up fast and cattle pens were on the down slow side of the station and the resulting "shifting of the ironwork" was the main reason for his complaint. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.