I have a number of unanswered questions on this for my own layout. It stems from the fact that there are two companies sharing the station, one will use a platform with a runround and the other will use a platform without. The Dyffryn Mynach will use the platform without. When the train arrives, the second loco will draw up to it ready for departure. When the train departs, the first loco will then proceed to the shed for coaling and watering; standard practice as I'm sure you already know. The Cwm Pwyll will use the runround with a watering facility at the throat end of the platform. So far so good.
However things are complicated by the fact that the Cwm Pwyll line is meant to be an hour's journey from Porth Illtud (the harbour) to Bryn Moel (the valley terminus). My question is whether a loco conducting a 2 hour journey would be runround like that or would it be sent to the shed as will happen with the Dyffryn Mynach loco?
A loco will only be sent to the shed for overnight stabling. Coaling will take place from a coaling stage next to the shed, or sometimes alongside a headshunt (Portmadoc had a coaling stage at the end of the line at some time). Cleaning the fire would take place over an ashpit, and watering the engine takes place anywhere along the line. On my layout there are ashpits and coaling stages not only at Rae Bridge shed, but also on sidings elsewhere. Cleaning the fire is usual after a long run, to make sure the grate doesn't clog up with ashes. So ashpits would be positioned somewhere in any main station. Water cranes or tanks are spaced out anywhere a train is scheduled to stop (stations, halts and sidings on the main line).
How long would a loco be able to run for between coalings? The Cwm Pwyll line will be using Campbeltown and Machrihanish 0-6-2Ts.
This depends on the load, the gradients, the air temperature and the skill of the crew. Generally, I think coaling up once every round trip would not be unusual. The late John Allen experimented with a timer on his trains that slowly ran out, cutting the power in the end. It was supposed to be re-set only when the loco was at a coaling stage or a water tank.
Quote from: tedp on December 15, 2011, 12:42
The late John Allen experimented with a timer on his trains that slowly ran out, cutting the power in the end. It was supposed to be re-set only when the loco was at a coaling stage or a water tank.
That's very sophisticated. However I've decided, on the basis of what you say, that the Cwm Pwyll line has its shed and coaling stage at the Bryn Moel end of the line (offstage at present) which would enable a runround with a watering at Porth Illtud to credibly take place.
Many thanks for your comments, Ted; generous as always.
I guess there is also the matter of logisitics. The coal has to come from somewhere (adjoining standard gauge, sea port or canal?) so it would make sense to coal up at the corresponding end of the line and move as little of it as necessary to other locations along the line.
On the surface this seems to be correct. But loco coal is needed where the bunkers are low after a particular service pattern of the loco. Most railways ran wagons of loco coal from the source to the coaling stages. Some of them even coaled up from a wagon.
In my particular scenario, coal would be imported through the dock to the valleys being, as it was, the main domestic and industrial fuel of its time, not just for the railways. This was actually the case at Aberdyfi and Abermaw (Barmouth). I dare say the same was true at Porthmadog as well.
Quote from: GraemeD on December 15, 2011, 14:15
"...it would make sense to coal up at the corresponding end of the line and move as little of it as necessary to other locations along the line."
Valid point Graeme. I recently realised that for 36 years the L&TR has had loco facilities at the top of the line but no coal wagons to get the loose coal up there! As one loco is always out-shedded at Tawel-llety I think it's high time the railway had some! Part of this winter's works programme I think...
Quote from: tedp on December 15, 2011, 14:19
On the surface this seems to be correct. But loco coal is needed where the bunkers are low after a particular service pattern of the loco. Most railways ran wagons of loco coal from the source to the coaling stages. Some of them even coaled up from a wagon.
Yes, I can see that this makes sense on a railway network or a long line that would have "supply dumps" along the route.
I don't suppose many 009 layouts (or the railways, real or imagined that they represent) are of this type. Many will go from the coast up to higher ground or from a centre of population and industry to the sources of goods or materials they were built to service.
I guess it depends on many things. I wonder for instance whether it might be more economic to send a "light engine" off by itself some distance to be refuelled than move resources to an awkward location, or whether engines might be swapped part way. In the case of goods other than perishables, fuel cost is going to be significant and delays less so, but passengers will be less patient.
It is all good fun and adds a lot to the operation and realism of the model. Similar logic can be applied to other aspects: for example, if there are extensive cattle or sheep pens, is there a market near by?
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 15, 2011, 10:54
However things are complicated by the fact that the Cwm Pwyll line is meant to be an hour's journey from Porth Illtud (the harbour) to Bryn Moel (the valley terminus). My question is whether a loco conducting a 2 hour journey would be runround like that or would it be sent to the shed as will happen with the Dyffryn Mynach loco?
The timetabled time between Llanmynach and Tawel-Llety is an hour each way and the train lays over for half an hour, which is plenty of time to coal up, oil round, water, oil etc for a single loco so in fact the three passenger trains and one goods train normally in service only need five locos. I actually use seven, with one loco laying over at Tawel-Llety and two at Llanmynach. Not actually necessary but it keeps all my models running and gives plenty of variety. It also means that I can introduce an extra train at any time without the panic of suddenly needing to find an extra loco!
As I wrote in the Cliffhanger thread, I think modelling railway operation is as much part of railway modelling as scenery and rolling stock. I feel many of us have a similar opinion.
There are several ways of representing traffic flows. Card systems have been in use for many decades and they can even be used to designate actual wagon loads going from one place to another: so many tons of coal, so many head of sheep or cattle. This is the most realistic approach as it directly makes you think of loads rather than wagons to transport them, but the down side of this is the amount of arithmetic needed to calculate the number of wagons needed. It is a bit indirect.
About 30 years ago I read of the goods circulation system devised by the late John Allen, who built the Gorre & Daphetid RR. I decided to implement that myself, as it is rolling stock oriented instead of load oriented. Rather than re-writing all this on the forum I would like to point you towards the web pages I wrote on the subject. I hope these are a useful contribution to this thread:
General operation approach: http://www.009dutch.nl/cdr/main/pages/eoperation.htm (http://www.009dutch.nl/cdr/main/pages/eoperation.htm)
Goods traffic simulation (John Allen system): http://www.009dutch.nl/cdr/main/pages/eoperation1.htm (http://www.009dutch.nl/cdr/main/pages/eoperation1.htm)
Quote from: GraemeD on December 15, 2011, 18:29
Yes, I can see that this makes sense on a railway network or a long line that would have "supply dumps" along the route.
I wonder for instance whether it might be more economic to send a "light engine" off by itself some distance to be refuelled than move resources to an awkward location, or whether engines might be swapped part way.
I'm not sure I understand the point fully. In the case of a valley where coal is imported via the harbour, coal trains would have to be marshalled to deliver coal to every town and village on the line for the benefit of domestic and commercial users alike. Adding another truck's worth for the railway would involve a very low marginal cost in terms of fuel resources. Perhaps I'm missing something here. ???
It might pay to investigate how the coal trade by rail was organised 80-odd years ago. Perhaps there were local peculiarities in the Welsh valleys but I think there was a general pattern to this kind of traffic. Loco coal may have been subject to the same rules but remember a steam loco is fired with a different quality coal from what you use for heating a house. So they won't be transported in the same ship's hold or necessarily in the same coal train.
One thing to remember is that in those days they didn't use 'just in time' delivery, using a single wagonload to an individual coaling stage right from the delivery source, as storage costs weren't as much in the picture as today. The logistics were therefore much simpler.
I think a railway company would order a batch of steam coal, transport it from the harbour in a number of wagons, store it at a central depot and forward it to various locations. A local coal merchant would order a batch of household grade coal (think of several wagon loads), store it on his own premises, bag it and distribute it by horse and cart. The traffic pattern is similar but the end distribution is different as the railway will use its own wagons to forward the loads.
As I understand it, coal was delivered to the West Wales ports serving the West Wales Valleys from Cardiff with coal produced in the South Wales Valleys. However I take your point that different coal would be used for different purposes though both types would be delivered to the port for distribution. When I spoke to a guide on a 19th century sailing schooner, his view was that coal would have been carried on board in sacks and manhandled off the ship by the crew. What I haven't been able to establish is whether bulk coal was ever delivered at this time (late 19th/early 20th century) and if so in what vessel.
I also take your point about distribution of steam coal. In my scenario therefore, the coal would be delivered to the shed at the valley terminus and distributed, if necessary, to other points of the line. With regards the domestic coal, my plans include a coal merchant's line in the goods yard where it is distributed locally. However a coal merchant's office would also be found at every goods yard on the line, which in those days would be at every significant station.
In addition to investigating the existence of bulk coal carrying sailing ships, I shall need to investigate the frequency of these deliveries to the ports.
How coal is delivered to an area or railway was dependant on several factors and changed over time.
I will take the FR as an example.
When the steam locos were introduced all the coal came by sea, later with the arrival of the standard gauge railways it became more cost effective to have deliveries by rail. The FR largely switched to oil firing in the 1960
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 15, 2011, 20:54
Quote from: GraemeD on December 15, 2011, 18:29
Yes, I can see that this makes sense on a railway network or a long line that would have "supply dumps" along the route.
I wonder for instance whether it might be more economic to send a "light engine" off by itself some distance to be refuelled than move resources to an awkward location, or whether engines might be swapped part way.
I'm not sure I understand the point fully. In the case of a valley where coal is imported via the harbour, coal trains would have to be marshalled to deliver coal to every town and village on the line for the benefit of domestic and commercial users alike. Adding another truck's worth for the railway would involve a very low marginal cost in terms of fuel resources. Perhaps I'm missing something here. ???
I suspect the coal usage is probably the other way round in a scenario where a NG railway serves the communitry rather than standard gauge, with domestic coal consumption being dwarfed by the amount needed by the railway. Only where the railway served a major industry or city would it be as you say.
It would appear that the annual per capita consumption of coal for domestic use remained fairly constant at under a ton from the late 19th to mid 20th centuries.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2NfFI60MMx8C&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=household+coal+consumption+in+1900+in+uk&source=bl&ots=Eg1DA0J_s2&sig=wpxXavUOsSm4XkBWwDmEIrmvw5E&hl=en&safe=active&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=household%20coal%20consumption%20in%201900%20in%20uk&f=false (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2NfFI60MMx8C&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=household+coal+consumption+in+1900+in+uk&source=bl&ots=Eg1DA0J_s2&sig=wpxXavUOsSm4XkBWwDmEIrmvw5E&hl=en&safe=active&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=household%20coal%20consumption%20in%201900%20in%20uk&f=false)
My guess is that those figures are biassed towards city consumption and that in mainly rural areas served by NG railways it is much lower. I'm sure there are exceptions and if the "big house" had an orangery it probably consumed more fuel than all the households from miles around!
I'd be interested to know what the largest population in the UK that was served by a NG railway and not standard gauge was. Of course there is nothing wrong with biassing geography and history in favour of NG railways for the sake of modelling. ;)
Quote from: GraemeD on December 16, 2011, 09:52
Of course there is nothing wrong with biassing geography and history in favour of NG railways for the sake of modelling. ;)
I've been found out! Damn you Graeme D!!! (smiley shaking a clenched fist in defeated frustration) ;)
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 15, 2011, 22:13
"...With regards the domestic coal, my plans include a coal merchant's line in the goods yard where it is distributed locally..."
Peco do packs of 24 filled coal sacks. I recently took delivery of a few loads for domestic coal up at Tawel-Llety.
Quote from: B.Meldon on December 16, 2011, 09:05
How coal is delivered to an area or railway was dependant on several factors and changed over time.
I will take the FR as an example.
When the steam locos were introduced all the coal came by sea, later with the arrival of the standard gauge railways it became more cost effective to have deliveries by rail. The FR largely switched to oil firing in the 1960s and that came by road. However the amount of coal needed would have become uneconomic to be delivered by rail anyway.
On a line without a direct standard gauge rail connection the change from sea to rail would have taken place in the 1920s with lories bringing the coal by road from the nearest railhead. By the time of the second world war the use of ports for local non bulk deliveries of any kind had dropped to a very low level although outgoing cargo, again mainly bulk items, remained common. When this change to road deliveries happened it would have been easy, depending on the condition of the roads, to have the coal delivered direct to the station where it was going to be used rather than the railway having to transport it. By the second world war there were very few placed that did not have roads good enough for coal lories.
So it all depends on the situation of your railway and the date it is set.
Brian Meldon
The railway is definitely set before the use of the internal combustion engine in the area. In my mind, I'm thinking 1880-1910 but don't hold me to that. There is no standard gauge connection, the idea being that trade is conducted by means of coastal sailing ships. It's also my intention that all the ships should be sail-driven though I may have to revise that view as steam-driven vessels were certainly around at this time. However one thing I am definite about and that is that there will be NO CLYDE PUFFERS!
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 16, 2011, 12:00
....................though I may have to revise that view as steam-driven vessels were certainly around at this time. However one thing I am definite about and that is that there will be NO CLYDE PUFFERS!
Why ever not Rhobart? Puffers certainly traded as far south and even further than your own location. I've seen a photo of one in Pentewan harbour, Cornwall for example.
Mick
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 16, 2011, 12:00
The railway is definitely set before the use of the internal combustion engine in the area. In my mind, I'm thinking 1880-1910 but don't hold me to that.
Not a diesel loco in sight then and no ex WW1 WD locos either.
That could be a bit restrictive on what you run!
Brian Meldon
Quote from: MickT on December 16, 2011, 12:38
Why ever not Rhobart? Puffers certainly traded as far south and even further than your own location. I've seen a photo of one in Pentewan harbour, Cornwall for example.
Mick
"It tends to be a bit of a modelling clich
Quote from: B.Meldon on December 16, 2011, 13:01
Not a diesel loco in sight then and no ex WW1 WD locos either.
That could be a bit restrictive on what you run!
Brian Meldon
No diesels were allowed to run as the deacons of the local chapel considered them to be the spawn of the devil! ;)
Or more credibly, diesels have never appealed to me, though I admire the craftsmanship of those who produce some splendid models. You are more likely to catch me out on the year of the locomotives I will be using (and I'm sure that you will) but I shall cross that bridge when I come to it.
As regards to no diesels being restrictive, are there not enough steam locomotives going around or have I missed the irony?
Cilche? Cliche? What about those of us who should have puffers on our layouts? :D
Glad to hear you're thinking of modelling an early era, Isle Ornsay will be 1913/14. It helps justify having a busier line as you'll be modelling it at it's height, rather than a period when it would have likely been in decline.
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 16, 2011, 10:16
Quote from: GraemeD on December 16, 2011, 09:52
Of course there is nothing wrong with biassing geography and history in favour of NG railways for the sake of modelling. ;)
I've been found out! Damn you Graeme D!!! (smiley shaking a clenched fist in defeated frustration) ;)
Aha! (in a Rabbit and Pooh sense, not Alan Partridge). I'd like to do a layout based on where I live near the NE coast of Scotland, but I'm still trying to think of reasons why NG might have thrived.
Quote from: GraemeD on December 16, 2011, 15:38
Aha! (in a Rabbit and Pooh sense, not Alan Partridge). I'd like to do a layout based on where I live near the NE coast of Scotland, but I'm still trying to think of reasons why NG might have thrived.
Graeme, I know it's a few miles south of you, but a coastal steam powered ng line with the nickname "Arbroath Smokie" is surely irresistible!
So, the narrow guage railway would be referred to as 'The Finnan'.
The 'other guage' would obviously be 'The Fickan' :-)
Quote from: garrywhiting on December 16, 2011, 17:44
Quote from: GraemeD on December 16, 2011, 15:38
Aha! (in a Rabbit and Pooh sense, not Alan Partridge). I'd like to do a layout based on where I live near the NE coast of Scotland, but I'm still trying to think of reasons why NG might have thrived.
Graeme, I know it's a few miles south of you, but a coastal steam powered ng line with the nickname "Arbroath Smokie" is surely irresistible!
;D :D
Worse puns exist round these parts! Meldrum Meg was the local loco (or perhaps the train) on the Meldrum branch. Of course the shop in the village is the Meldrum Megastore.
Arbroath smokies - from this man: http://www.arbroathsmokies.net/ (http://www.arbroathsmokies.net/) (Mmmm, gurgle, drool (after Homer Simpson)) straight from the smoker at the Port Soy boat festival.
Unfortunately the name is more or less taken with a (very) NG railway that exists in Arbroath and it runs along side the main line: http://www.kerrsminiaturerailway.co.uk/ (http://www.kerrsminiaturerailway.co.uk/)
Quote from: invercloy on December 16, 2011, 14:01
Cilche? Cliche? What about those of us who should have puffers on our layouts? :D
Then it's a cultural icon! :D
Quote from: invercloy on December 16, 2011, 14:01
Glad to hear you're thinking of modelling an early era, Isle Ornsay will be 1913/14. It helps justify having a busier line as you'll be modelling it at it's height, rather than a period when it would have likely been in decline.
I really wanted to capture the spirit of a Welsh Wales seaport at its height when there was a considerable amount of global trade by sailing ship. If I model it at a later period, then I would have a number of modelling problems: sailing ships would no longer have carried that trade, the internal combustion engine would have replaced the railway as the main form of freight transport (as it stands, everything has to be carried by the railway thus justifying its busy nature), and the economic decline would have well and truly set in by the end of the First World War. Therefore I have given myself the provisional time period of 1880-1920. I intend to choose my locos on the basis that I like them. Thus I may end up with some anachronistic choices; but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
In the meantime, I'm very much looking forward to seeing Isle Ornsay in the flesh at Sparsholt. I shall be needing some inspiration and encouragement by then and I doubt that I'll be disappointed. ;D
Talking of coal transportation, ship to NG, this rather excellent photo popped up on the "opposition":
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi305.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fnn213%2FRussellP_photos%2F0n30%2520Coal%2520Car%2FWMRCoalCar.jpg&hash=decb391da0739226cdb2c4c0fa15a002335d9b96)
http://ngrm-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=3402 (http://ngrm-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=3402)
Image in ngrm-online linked from:
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn213/RussellP_photos/0n30%20Coal%20Car/WMRCoalCar.jpg (http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn213/RussellP_photos/0n30%20Coal%20Car/WMRCoalCar.jpg)
Yes that's a very interesting photo. It's the first time I've seen the use of caskets on a rope and tackle to transfer coal from ship to wagon. When I spoke to a guide on a sailing schooner, it was his view that the coal would have been transported in sacks on the ship and manhandled ashore by the crew. But it left me wondering when did coal being carried in bulk on ships begin and being loaded in bulk onto wagons begin. I think this photo suggests a transition phase between the two.
However I think that a trip to the National Waterfront Museum in Swansea is called for.
Quote from: Rhobat Bryn on December 19, 2011, 11:52
Yes that's a very interesting photo. It's the first time I've seen the use of caskets on a rope and tackle to transfer coal from ship to wagon. When I spoke to a guide on a sailing schooner, it was his view that the coal would have been transported in sacks on the ship and manhandled ashore by the crew. But it left me wondering when did coal being carried in bulk on ships begin and being loaded in bulk onto wagons begin. I think this photo suggests a transition phase between the two.
Are you absolutely certain that's what happening? It could be that the ship is being loaded.
Quote from: garrywhiting on December 19, 2011, 13:26
Are you absolutely certain that's what happening? It could be that the ship is being loaded.
Hmm, good question. I assumed from the angle of the casket on the left that the coal was being poured into the wagon but it could be that the casket is being used to shovel coal instead. A moot point ...
What we are seeing is two baskets being employed for coal handling. They are each shackled to two runner wires on opposing pairs of derricks, one runner on a derrick slung over the quay, and another on a derrick slung inboard. The rearmost basket is empty and they seem to be waiting till the men at the other one have finished. The caption on NGRM says the coal wagons are used on bunkering duty.
I think the baskets are filled in the wagon, then hauled inboard on the connected runners and emptied over the engine room coal bunker chute. This usually had a small hatch on the main deck.
A very interesting photo, but this is typical for steamship working, not for sailing ships. Bagged coal must have been the norm there, unless the sailing vessel had a donkey engine for cargo work. These weren't available on sailing coasters, only on big square riggers. Paying a visit to the museum to read up on this practice will always pay off though.
Quote from: tedp on December 19, 2011, 15:55
What we are seeing is two baskets being employed for coal handling. They are each shackled to two runner wires on opposing pairs of derricks, one runner on a derrick slung over the quay, and another on a derrick slung inboard. The rearmost basket is empty and they seem to be waiting till the men at the other one have finished. The caption on NGRM says the coal wagons are used on bunkering duty.
I think the baskets are filled in the wagon, then hauled inboard on the connected runners and emptied over the engine room coal bunker chute. This usually had a small hatch on the main deck.
A very interesting photo, but this is typical for steamship working, not for sailing ships. Bagged coal must have been the norm there, unless the sailing vessel had a donkey engine for cargo work. These weren't available on sailing coasters, only on big square riggers. Paying a visit to the museum to read up on this practice will always pay off though.
Thank you, Ted, for your confirmation. I thought that it was the ship being bunkered, and not the wagons being loaded.
Quote from: tedp on December 19, 2011, 15:55
What we are seeing is two baskets being employed for coal handling. They are each shackled to two runner wires on opposing pairs of derricks, one runner on a derrick slung over the quay, and another on a derrick slung inboard. The rearmost basket is empty and they seem to be waiting till the men at the other one have finished. The caption on NGRM says the coal wagons are used on bunkering duty.
I think the baskets are filled in the wagon, then hauled inboard on the connected runners and emptied over the engine room coal bunker chute. This usually had a small hatch on the main deck.
Many thanks for that, Ted. Your expert knowledge has saved the day once again. However I'm curious as to the development of sailing ships, particularly those used in the Western seaports, and which ships were used for what purposes. Secondary sources are a bit few and far between. I've been able to get hold of a book called "The Brig 'Susannah' of Aberdyfi" which charts its history for the first half of the 19th century until it was lost on the rocks just outside Aberdyfi. The basic rule seems to have been slate out and grain in; but I really need a good day out where you can pour through the records and move from source to source to get a more complete picture. A little post-Christmas project perhaps.
Expert knowledge? I'd rather call it an educated guess, as I'm only certain of post-WW2 shipping practice. May I suggest you look at East Coast sailing colliers as well? Some light may be shed on coal cargo in sailing ships. Similar practice may have been the norm on the Welsh coast.
http://www.scarboroughsmaritimeheritage.org.uk/ascarboroughcolliers.php (http://www.scarboroughsmaritimeheritage.org.uk/ascarboroughcolliers.php)
http://www.lostbrig.net/latest_news_2011.html (http://www.lostbrig.net/latest_news_2011.html)
An extract from the latter website says the following, suggesting sailing colliers carried coal in bulk, not in bags:
Definition of 'Collier' from... The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea 2006.
Collier, a vessel in the 17th and 18th (And 19TH S.G.) centuries which carried coal in bulk. These collier brigs, as they were called, carried 'sea coal' from the northern east coast ports of Britain to London, and from other ports to other destinations. Loading and discharging arrangements were both primitive and the amount of coal carried was very small, though it sufficed for domestic requirements during the sailing era. A typical collier brig could carry about 300-400 tons of coal, unloading it into lighters moored alongside, by a system known as 'coal whipping'.
Coal whipping suggests the use of a 'whip' on a yardarm - a light runner through a single block used to haul light loads of coal from the hold. They may have used baskets much like those in the New Zealand photo. The 'whip' must have been manually powered - a few men could haul a light load up from the hold, with a steering line to keep it clear from the hatchway, then this would have been let go so the load swung outboard over the lighter.
Edit: there is a print showing 'coal whipping' here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B000RODLS2/ref=dp_image_text_z_0/280-3203588-6460245?ie=UTF8&n=11052681&s=kitchen (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B000RODLS2/ref=dp_image_text_z_0/280-3203588-6460245?ie=UTF8&n=11052681&s=kitchen)
From the print it seems they used a whip to haul the coal from the hold using some kind of bucket and a chute to tip it into a barge alongside.
Quote from: tedp on December 19, 2011, 20:14
Collier, a vessel in the 17th and 18th (And 19TH S.G.) centuries which carried coal in bulk. These collier brigs, as they were called, carried 'sea coal' from the northern east coast ports of Britain to London, and from other ports to other destinations. Loading and discharging arrangements were both primitive and the amount of coal carried was very small, though it sufficed for domestic requirements during the sailing era. A typical collier brig could carry about 300-400 tons of coal, unloading it into lighters moored alongside, by a system known as 'coal whipping'.
Coal whipping suggests the use of a 'whip' on a yardarm - a light runner through a single block used to haul light loads of coal from the hold. They may have used baskets much like those in the New Zealand photo. The 'whip' must have been manually powered - a few men could haul a light load up from the hold, with a steering line to keep it clear from the hatchway, then this would have been let go so the load swung outboard over the lighter.
Edit: there is a print showing 'coal whipping' here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B000RODLS2/ref=dp_image_text_z_0/280-3203588-6460245?ie=UTF8&n=11052681&s=kitchen (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B000RODLS2/ref=dp_image_text_z_0/280-3203588-6460245?ie=UTF8&n=11052681&s=kitchen)
From the print it seems they used a whip to haul the coal from the hold using some kind of bucket and a chute to tip it into a barge alongside.
That's a very useful insight Ted. I keep forgetting that a lot longer was taken in the loading of freight in those days, as they had the time, so I suspect the crew would think nothing of discharging a bulk freight using a method of hauling light loads. The time taken would far outweigh the hard labour of having to do it all by hand. On a slightly different point, in the South Wales ports the principle was coal out and grain in. Presumably the holds would have to be thoroughly washed down before the new shipment was loaded or am I imposing 21st century values retrospectively? Anyway, I shall report back after my visit to Swansea. I think we'll need to open a new theme on Dockside Freight Loading and Unloading. ;)
You've certainly caught people's imagination here Rhobat!
Searching Google for images comes up with a few things. I typed in "coal sailing loading" and one photo was of a sailing boat being loaded in Swansea here:
http://www.swanseadocks.co.uk/North%20Dock%20&%20New%20Cut%202.htm (http://www.swanseadocks.co.uk/North%20Dock%20&%20New%20Cut%202.htm)
Unfortunately this is "loading" and I guess you want "unloading". Found this (surprisingly late date!)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottishmaritimemuseum/4745151021/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottishmaritimemuseum/4745151021/)
The extended caption is interested, but it mentions that dreaded pu**er word! OK it is not a sailing vessel, but I guess the unloading method used may be applicable.
Edit:
How about this if you want to go really industrial!
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.wholesale-prints.net/MAA1873/MAA1873504.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.old-print.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi%3Fitem%3DMAA1873504&usg=__cFIuKt2H2eyOteqEPcaL3paR1QY=&h=850&w=1242&sz=93&hl=en&start=30&sig2=tB-YDKQHf8ShBE026Tur-g&zoom=1&tbnid=r6oDi6ZCNvI9kM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=150&ei=gFTwTvKtBISP8gPhhrWkAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcoal%2Bunloading%2Bfrom%2Bsailing%2Bships%26start%3D20%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1G1SMSN_ENUK458%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1 (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.wholesale-prints.net/MAA1873/MAA1873504.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.old-print.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi%3Fitem%3DMAA1873504&usg=__cFIuKt2H2eyOteqEPcaL3paR1QY=&h=850&w=1242&sz=93&hl=en&start=30&sig2=tB-YDKQHf8ShBE026Tur-g&zoom=1&tbnid=r6oDi6ZCNvI9kM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=150&ei=gFTwTvKtBISP8gPhhrWkAQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcoal%2Bunloading%2Bfrom%2Bsailing%2Bships%26start%3D20%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1G1SMSN_ENUK458%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1)
And again:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/pnp/det/4a10000/4a18000/4a18300/4a18384r.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/det1994016029/PP/&usg=__ljcBlPjb3Bo9qzYv5Mnw3CK6YC4=&h=640&w=513&sz=76&hl=en&start=68&sig2=lqcmtp4xFd5-9snUjgmVow&zoom=1&tbnid=qEccsEGG7-obmM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=110&ei=nFXwTrSYF9Sd8gO74qi3AQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcoal%2Bunloading%2Bfrom%2Bsailing%2Bships%26start%3D60%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1G1SMSN_ENUK458%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1 (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://lcweb2.loc.gov/service/pnp/det/4a10000/4a18000/4a18300/4a18384r.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/det1994016029/PP/&usg=__ljcBlPjb3Bo9qzYv5Mnw3CK6YC4=&h=640&w=513&sz=76&hl=en&start=68&sig2=lqcmtp4xFd5-9snUjgmVow&zoom=1&tbnid=qEccsEGG7-obmM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=110&ei=nFXwTrSYF9Sd8gO74qi3AQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcoal%2Bunloading%2Bfrom%2Bsailing%2Bships%26start%3D60%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1G1SMSN_ENUK458%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%3Divns&itbs=1)
Google "coal unloading from sailing ships"
Many thanks for those references, Graeme. They were very intriguing. I also came across a mid 18th century "trade card" kept at the British Museum which seems to illustrate exactly what Ted is describing. The ship is in the background with the lighter in the foreground and a coal-heaver carrying caskets on his back across a plank to the dock where a horse-drawn cart is waiting to transport them away. This would seem to represent the basic model of unloading coal from sailing ships.
www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pd/t/trade_card_of_philip_frachard.aspx (http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pd/t/trade_card_of_philip_frachard.aspx)
Later, as Ted suggests, whipping replaced the manhandling onto the lighter and, when ships were able to dock, replaced the lighter and the manhandling.
I'm beginning to have doubts about what I was told about coal being transported in sacks. Wouldn't coal merchants have been the ones to bag the coal? And wouldn't that be because it made delivery more manageable for the coalman and, where required, more dust-free for the customer?
Quote from: GraemeD on December 20, 2011, 09:21
You've certainly caught people's imagination here Rhobat!
Well, it's caught my imagination too, Graeme. The way things are going I'm going to have a model of Bae Illtud (
Illtud Bay) and its port, with a narrow gauge railway in the background for scenic effect!
Another area of research includes the unloading and storage of grain at dockside warehouses. This is one of the reasons I'm looking forward to Vol 3 of Wild Swan's GWR Goods Services by Tony Atkins which will look at the handling of freight at GWR docks, due to be published in April of next year.
Of course I've lost now, ??? but I did come across another forum where they were discussing a similar topic and carrying sacks on the backs of men was mentioned.
Quote from: GraemeD on December 20, 2011, 17:09
Of course I've lost now, ???
Apologies Graeme. I'm getting caught up in the excitement of it all (I know, I need to get out more).
Quote from: GraemeD on December 20, 2011, 17:09
but I did come across another forum where they were discussing a similar topic and carrying sacks on the backs of men was mentioned.
Do you have a reference for that Graeme?
What a difference two letters make. I meant to type "of course I've lost IT now", referring to the link.
Luckily I found it again in the Internet history on my notebook:
http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214935 (http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214935)
See the reply by "VO5" on that page.
(I would not take any of my knowledge in things nautical too seriously as my primary source is "Hornblower" ;D )
Many thanks Graeme; that's a very valuable insight. The sacks therefore were used in the same way as caskets. Given that this was accepted practice, I now need to find out which was used (though it could have been both) in West Wales.
Quote from: GraemeD on December 20, 2011, 22:25
(I would not take any of my knowledge in things nautical too seriously as my primary source is "Hornblower" ;D )
It could be worse; you could have said 'Popeye'. ;)
Somethink else to bear in mind is tides. I believe in parts of Wales the difference between high and low tide can be rather large (as much as 3 m?). If it is going to take a day or two to offload then gang planks will need to cope with them. I would guess a pontoon might be necessary and space in a sheltered harbour in hilly/mountainous country is going to be at a premium.
My personal choice would be some sort of basket/crane contrivance. There are instances of novel and canny mechanisms in the area and era. I remember visiting the site of this when my parents lived in the area:
http://www.ceredigion.gov.uk/utilities/action/act_download.cfm?mediaid=17537&langtoken=eng (http://www.ceredigion.gov.uk/utilities/action/act_download.cfm?mediaid=17537&langtoken=eng)
I think the remains of the winding gear were still visible.
Many small harbours dry out at low tide, so the height difference may be much less even with a tidal range of several metres. The height of a quay wall would allow for spring tides not overflowing the quay. In addition an empty ship rides high and a loaded one has a low freeboard. If a whip on a yardarm is used however cargo work can continue at all states of the tide. Loading operations over a gangway are no problem as long as you use a long gangway so the angle isn't too acute. In practice all kinds of solutions would be found - there never is a cookbook approach in seafaring. Improvisation is the word. ;)
In addition, the jetty at Aberdovey was built in 1887 so that ships could load and unload regardless of the tides. The length of the jetty was 370 ft.
I've just returned from my visit to the National Waterfront Museum at Swansea with a few additional facts. There is a large scale model there of a Western Ocean Yacht, i.e. three-masted schooner of Porthmadog fame, and it clearly shows that there was a winch next to the main hold at midships attached to a block and tackle. The block and tackle were also attached to a beam (I need to improve my naval terminology) which could be swung from the centre line across the ship's edge onto the dockside, very similar, if not the same, to the whipping described by Ted. Interestingly there was also an old photograph showing planks running from the dockside onto the deck with men standing holding wooden wheelbarrows. I surmise from this that, in these particular circumstances, the slates would have been wheelbarrowed onto the deck by the hold and then winched down using the block and tackle, the reason being that it would have been quicker to do it this way rather than using the hoist for each batch of slates, and there would have plenty of cheap labour around to do the work. I was also able to ascertain that certain loads were carried in bulk on these ships, marble from Italy for one. I suspect that the marble would have been unloaded using caskets similar to those for coal though I haven't been able to ascertain this for sure.
Just as importantly, I have been given the name of the Curator of the Museum, whose speciality is maritime history, so that I can contact him regarding my enquiries when he returns from holiday. So watch this space for more five-anorak quality detail regarding the loading and unlaoding of freight at Welsh ports. A pub quiz based on this thread will be held in December 2012 to test your knowledge of this crucial subject.
Is this the same quizz when we shall be asked about pug bashes? ;D
Quote from: pilotfriend on December 30, 2011, 00:38
Is this the same quizz when we shall be asked about pug bashes? ;D
I'm afraid I can't comment on that as the trial is still pending in the High Court. :)
Happy New Year, John.
Rhobat: the beam you refer to is called a 'derrick' in steamers. In sailing ships it may have been called a 'boom' - this is the term used for the spar at the bottom of a schooner's fore-and-aft sails. I expect this might have been used for the same purpose. In a steamship they put one derrick over the quay and another over the hold, with guy ropes to prevent them from swinging. The runners on the derricks were connected so you could haul a load from the quay to the hold by winching up on one, then taking over on the other runner. This was a very quick and expert operation.
I'm looking forward to your quiz. Put in one or two questions about pugbashes to satisfy John!