Restoring Steamships and Maritime Heritage in the UK – Lock, Dock and Two Smoking Vessels

By Maryann Soper

Thousands of people across the UK are actively saving our maritime heritage by supporting one of the many organisations set up to restore vessels or promote careers in maritime. As we know, our little island has a rich seafaring past and is littered with historic ports. Thankfully, many of them are seeing a revival as top quality regeneration and investment has seen remarkable success. Coastal docks, such as The Royal Albert Docks in Liverpool are absolutely thriving with fairground rides and an upbeat vibe, since the heritage-led regeneration; and as such plays a crucial part in the World Heritage Site designation. We also have recent success in Hull, where £23m has been pledged to regenerate the maritime heritage of the region.

Liverpool’s Historic Docks © Copyright Maryann Soper

Then we have glorious historic docks snuggled inland, like those at Gloucester, with a more subtle and sedate retail and leisure space. The Sharpness Canal ran ships inland from the River Severn and Gloucester was a major trading centre. And so we are bestowed with iconic warehouses, still proudly adorned with their names.

Gloucester’s Historic Docks © Copyright Chris Allen and licensed for reuse under CC by SA 2.0

Staying in the Southwest, we must mention Brunel’s Bristol Docks; they too have been subject to a successful regeneration programme, with education and discovery in maritime and industrial heritage at its core.

The SS Great Britain at Bristol © Copyright GooseyGoo

These are scenes where current culture is enjoyed while maintaining and honouring the fabric of the culture that shaped us. It’s a perfect blend for a sustainable future, which is why society’s such as the Steamship Freshspring Society are adopting a heritage-led, education-focussed, commercially viable, community-based plan.

Advice from the experts in the Heritage Lottery Fund remind us frequently that they invest in robust long-term plans, rather than plug holes in projects with cash, so we can see the wisdom in their logic in the regenerated historic docks around us.

The Freshspring Society are not the first to be operating in this way and we must look to our friends in Liverpool for inspiration and council, those from the Daniel Adamson Preservation Society. The Steam Tug Daniel Adamson is very comparable to the ss Freshspring; it is of a similar size and technology and was also saved from the brink of disaster.

Daniel Adamson © Copyright Chris Allen and licensed for reuse under CC by SA 2.0

Daniel Adamson was the engineer who had the original vision for the Manchester Ship Canal, which has been described as one of the greatest engineering projects of the 19th century.

The twin screw, coal-fired steam tug was built at the Cammell Laird shipyard in Birkenhead and is a remarkable survivor from the steam age and a most unusual vessel. It was built in 1903 to tow long strings of barges laden with goods from the inland towns of Cheshire and the Potteries to the seaport at Liverpool. The Danny had been laid-up and neglected with no funding for even basic maintenance since 1984. Dan Cross was the impetus for the bid to save her. Dan, a skipper of a powerful modern tug currently at Milford Haven and with an interest in many aspects of heritage, canvassed fellow tug enthusiasts and bought the tug for £1.

The Daniel Adamson Preservation Society or DAPS, formed in 2004 and it took 12 years to get the tug ship-shape. The objective of the society is quite simply, “To conserve and restore to full working order, the steam powered tug tender and to operate her in and around the Mersey Estuary for public benefit”.

They started off by getting a free tow out of Ellesmere Port to Liverpool for her restoration there, which sounds rather familiar to the Freshspring’s restoration journey, thanks to Keynvor MorLift Ltd.

They also got the tug listed as a nationally important vessel by its addition to the coveted National Historic Ships Register. This vital proof shows the potential funders that the ship is special even though it is in a sorry state. Other great names on the register include the SS Great Britain and the Cutty Sark! Well, this too has been the course of the Freshspring.

The DAPS workshop at Sandon Dock, used by the engineers, includes a machine shop filled with donated equipment and was vital to the project, with training facilities donated by the Llangollen Railway group. The Freshspring Society have and are making partnerships with the local railway groups in North Devon to form a heritage engineering pool of resources and experts to raise the progress of industrial heritage preservation in the region.

The team at DAPS were very active in their fundraising activity and early in the project were supported by grants from charitable foundations such as Esmee Fairbairn, Garfield Weston and PRISM, which acted as “seed corn” to get the project underway. The much bigger grants came later; from the HLF amounting close to £4 million and a landfill tax funded grant of £75k via WREN for the art-deco areas.

Wrapped in plastic sheeting and with her paintwork clearly the worse for wear, being in the public eye during the events at Liverpool, she was able to attract 13,000 visitors, who donated £11,000 for her restoration! This helped to provide evidence for the HLF award that the public wanted the vessel to return to operational service. Freshspring’s strategic positioning in Bideford allows the general public to see her and thus footfall will also contribute to fundraising applications and evidence that she is being adopted the people.

Meanwhile, the big bid to the HLF was being worked on and gaining momentum behind the scenes.

The DAPS application gained the support (in writing) from major museums, MP’s , councils and organisations. It had to prove it was a sustainable investment for the benefit of the community, so revenue streams had to be determined and justified.

And then there’s the matter of match funding!

DAPS had to raise another £175,000 in matched contributions. After restoration, revenue is generated by the pleasure trips, but up until that point other strategies were implemented, such the “Danny” ale, a 4.2% hopped bitter, sold throughout the North west paying royalties to the DAPS. And Freshspring too will follow suit and develop multiple creative revenue streams to pay for the running costs and contribute to that crucial match-funding.

When the HLF bid was successful, the restoration contract was put out to tender and Camel Lairds of Birkenhead were the successful bidders. Once again it was a Svitzer tug that was to be involved in towing her into the Birkenhead dry dock, literally yards from where she was built in 1903!

£3m was spent, thanks to the Heritage lottery Fund, to recreate this superb and unique art-deco boat.

So the DAPS’ 12 year journey, of endless effort, looks a little like this:

Pioneering People – keeping the vision strong
Paperwork – obtaining charity status
Proof of Provenance – National Register of Historic Ships
Freebies and Favours by Corporations – essential help, such as, towing and engineering works
Prominent People – profile building and social clout!
Practical People – All hands on deck! Do what you can, but properly!
Paperwork People – The major fundraising campaign – behind the scenes
Plain Sight – being in the public domain provided valuable evidence for grant applications
The HLF and Restoration – Submitting the application and sending the ship away for restoration
Delivering the Dream – operating the vessel and generating revenue

The Steamship Freshspring is in year four of turning its life around and major strides have already been made, thanks to a close involvement with the right people from the very start. They have the Pioneers, the paperwork, proof of provenance, freebies and favours, prominent, practical and creative friends and she is sitting proudly in public view in Bideford, North Devon, so they’re really in the final two stages of delivering the dream!

The Steamship Freshspring on her way to Bideford, 2016.

Meanwhile, a dream came true for our friends in Liverpool – on the 22nd of April 2017, enthusiasts gathered at Latchford Locks to witness the Daniel Adamson make its first voyage to Salford along the whole length of the Manchester Ship Canal, since 1984. Everything was going feel until they got to Latchford Swing Bridge, which stubbornly refused to open.

They say that Daniel Adamson would have been turning in his grave, but I think he would have been proud of the marvellous maritime success stories in the UK; lock, dock and vessel.

11th July 2017MaryannComments OffPreservation, Steam Power, Transportation

Adapting to change – together!

Challenges in Industrial Heritage

Adapting to change – together!

One of the challenges in the industrial heritage sector is sustainable planning. There are several aspects to consider when it comes to building sustainability into any business plan, but there is one major social issue when it comes to industrial monuments – the need to address the decline of industrial archaeology and heritage knowledge in the popular consciousness.

The original movement motivated by ‘Industrial Heritage is Worth Saving’, has been heard and responded to.

It has been successful and we have much to thank the pioneers of industrial archaeology in the 60s and 70s for. As they pass on the baton to younger generations, we must consolidate our efforts on the next phase; I suggest a subtle shift to ‘Industrial Heritage Has Value’ or ‘Is Valuable’.

Despite many of our industrial structures and sites being nationally recognised and some even adopted onto the UNESCO List of World Heritage Sites, there are still an alarming number of sites on the English Heritage At Risk Register. Fortunately, there has been a surge in niche enthusiast groups displaying their committed interest and collective knowledge in the form of website and social media groups and indeed digital photography has played a very important role in visually mapping the locations and conditions of our relics; this has been particularly important for the unmanned relics for which there are few effective protections.

Now we need to educate and share the solutions for adaptive reuse that we have seen to be successful. We need to be driven by the idea of saving our important brownfield sites from modern development. And although I don’t think for a moment banners depicting the slogan “Save our Brownfields” would hold any sway, I do believe that industry leaders could work together to inspire property owners, developers, and community groups to be creative with their visions and capitalise on the added values that heritage-led regeneration can bring, and not just the financial incentives!

There are many ways in which our built heritage enriches our culture; their very existence was often responsible for the formation of ‘the town’ and forms the narrative for its ongoing development. As an integral part of the local story, to eradicate the evidence is an irreversible loss to communities. Regional identities play a key role in civic pride. Not only that, but in many cases the authenticity of the real thing cannot be successfully recreated. Yes, there are rules and restrictions, but clever solutions are being devised all the time.

Adaptive Re-use/ Visitor Attractions/ Maintaining Existing Use/ Monuments/ Building Preservation

The solutions are as varied as the sites themselves and some highly innovative solutions can be seen on the continent. In the Netherlands, a dockside crane has been successfully reorganised into a luxury hideaway for two for paying guests. Back in the UK, we already have limekilns playing host to cafés and engine houses turned into dwellings.

So, let’s make it easier, let’s share what works – decades of successful adaptive reuse ideas. Let’s re-inject the notion of heritage-led regeneration into the popular consciousness, to save our favourite brownfield sites!

By Maryann Soper, April 2017

4th April 2017MaryannComments OffPreservation

Taking the lead on lead (Pb)!

Historic England writes on the history of the lead industry in the UK.

Approximately 10,000 lead industry sites are estimated to survive in England, spanning nearly three millennia of mining history from the later Bronze Age (c.1000 BC) until the present day, though before the Roman period it is likely to have been on a small scale.

Two hundred and fifty one (251) lead industry sites, representing approximately 2.5% of the estimated national archaeological resource for the industry, have been identified as being of national importance.

This selection of nationally important monuments, compiled and assessed through a comprehensive survey of the lead industry, is designed to represent the industry’s chronological depth, technological breadth and regional diversity.

Nucleated lead mines are a prominent type of field monument produced by lead mining; they consist of a range of features grouped around the adits and/or shafts of a mine. The simplest examples contain merely a shaft or adit with associated spoil tip, but more complex and (in general) later examples may include remains of engine houses for pumping and/or winding from shafts, housing, lodging shops and offices, powder houses for storing gunpowder, power transmission features such as wheel pits, dams and leats. The majority of nucleated lead mines also included ore works, where the mixture of ore and waste rock extracted from the ground was separated (‘dressed’) to form a smeltable concentrate.

The range of processes used can be summarised as:

picking out of clean lumps of ore and waste;
breaking down of lumps to smaller sizes (either by manual hammering or mechanical crushing);
sorting of broken material by size;
separation of gravel-sized material by shaking on a sieve in a tub of water (‘jigging’); and
separation of finer material by washing away the lighter waste in a current of water (‘buddling’).

The field remains of ore works vary widely and include the remains of crushing devices, separating structures and tanks, tips of distinctive waste from the various processes, together with associated water supply and power installations, such as wheel pits and, more rarely, steam engine houses.

The majority of nucleated lead mines with ore works are of 18th to 20th century date, earlier mining being normally by rake or hush and including scattered ore dressing features (a ‘hush’ is a gully or ravine partly excavated by use of a controlled torrent of water to reveal or exploit a vein of mineral ore).

Nucleated lead mines often illustrate the great advances in industrial technology associated with the period known as the Industrial Revolution and, sometimes, also inform an understanding of the great changes in social conditions which accompanied it.

Because of the greatly increased scale of working associated with nucleated mining such features can be a major component of many upland landscapes. It is estimated that several thousand sites exist, the majority being small mines of limited importance, although the important early remains of many larger mines have often been greatly modified or destroyed by continued working or by modern reworking.

A sample of the better preserved sites, illustrating the regional, chronological and technological range of the class, is considered to merit protection.

Barytes is a vein mineral normally found in association with lead deposits, particularly in the North Pennines. The dominant period of extraction was in the late 19th and 20th centuries and a high proportion of its extraction has come from former lead mines, either by renewed underground workings or re-processing dumps, barytes having been discarded as gangue or waste rock.

The processing of barytes was relatively simple and involved crushing, jigging, drying and grinding at a mill into a powder.

The chief uses of barytes have been as a cheap, inert white filler in the manufacture of paper and paint and more recently it has been used as the basis for barium chemicals.

And now you know!

See the entry on the Historic England website – HERE!

31st January 2017MaryannComments OffMining, Processes

Lime is of the Essence!

Historic England on Lime Burning…..

Limestone or chalk has been the basic ingredient for lime mortar from at least Roman times.

Since the medieval period, lime has also been used as agricultural fertiliser and, since the early 19th century, widely used in a variety of other industries: as a flux in blast furnaces, in the production of gas and oil, and in the chemical, pharmaceutical and food industries.

The lime industry is defined as the processes of preparing and producing lime by burning and slaking.

The basic raw material for producing lime is limestone or chalk: when burnt at high temperature (roasted or calcined), these rocks release carbon dioxide, leaving `quicklime’ which, by chemical reaction when mixed with water (`slaking’), can be turned into a stable powder – lime.

Lime burning sites varied in scale from individual small lime kilns adjacent to a quarry, to large-scale works designed to operate commercially for an extended market and often associated with long distance water or rail transport. Lime burning as an industry displays well-developed regional characteristics, borne out by the regional styles of East Anglia, West Gloucestershire or Derbyshire.

The form of kilns used for lime burning evolved throughout the history of the industry, from small intermittent clamp and flare kilns, to large continuously fired draw kilns that could satisfy increased demand from urban development, industrial growth and agricultural improvement. Small-scale rural lime production continued in the later 19th and 20th centuries, but this period of the industry is mainly characterised by large-scale production and the transfer of technologies from the cement and other industries.

The demand for mortars grew steadily during the 19th and 20th centuries. The successful production of mortars made with artificial cement represented an economic challenge to lime production and gradually replaced the use of lime mortars in major construction and engineering projects.

Around 200 lime industry sites have been defined as being of national importance. These have been defined to represent the industry’s chronological depth, technological breadth and regional diversity.

Written by Historic England.

14th December 2016Maryann No commentsProcesses

Dreams of Steam leave you Beaming

Where did it all begin? This is an overview of the birth of the beam engine…..

Thomas Savery, a Devonian military engineer and inventor turned his attention to the problem of pumping water from the lucrative Cornish mines – we’re talking 1690s here! He successfully patented an atmospheric steam engine, which in truth closely followed the principles of a machine published by Edward Somerset way back in 1662 – such is life!

Savery’s early steam engine was mainly based on the compartmentalisation of steam by shutting off taps in order to create a partial vacuum. This was created by the condensing steam in a closed space that included the surface water deep in the mine via pipes. The suck of the vacuum dragged the water up into the pipes at the bottom of the mine and then another tap was shut off to retain it there. The tap to the outlet pipe was then opened to release the water. Needless to say, it was inefficient! It was also the only solution at the time to deal with flooding mines! Annoyingly, it could only raise water about 30ft, so mines needed a whole series of Savery pumps.

Savery’s pumps were employed ‘successfully’ for many years to maintain water supplies in various locations in London, including Hampton Court!

Amazingly, his original patent was extended by an Act of Parliament and it covered all types of steam engines that pumped water! Although Savery died in 1715, royalties from this somewhat lucky patent continued to be paid into his estate until 1733.

So, the genius that is Thomas Newcomen (also born in Devon) was forced to go into business with Savery when he invented the world’s first practical steam pumping engine. He improved Savery’s pumping engine by replacing the steam reservoir with a cylinder and moveable piston in 1710 – see? Genius!

The piston was actually originally invented by a French engineer called Denis Papin in 1690. The piston was forced up inside the cylinder by the pressure of the steam and sucked down by the vacuum created by water-cooled condensed steam. Newcomen attached the the top end of the piston to a rocking beam via a chain. The other end of said beam was attached to a pump deep in the mine underwater. The up and down movement of the beam caused the water in the mine to be drawn into the pump and forced to the surface.

Water could now be raised 150 feet! Newcomen’s Common Engines were built in large numers, with some remaining in commercial use for over 150 years!

Newcomen’s beam engines were a major leap in technology and were soon being used to drain deep mines throughout Britain and Europe, so he should have been rich right? Wrong, that Savery patent denied him any financial success from the major contribution to deep lode mining. Newcomen died in 1729, just 4 years before Savery’s patent expired.

And there was the Hornblowers!

The Hornblowers were a Cornish family and pioneers in steam power in the 18th and early 19th century. Joseph Hornblower (1696-1762) worked as an installer of Newcomen beam engines in Cornish mines in the early 1700s.

Joseph’s eldest son, Jonathan Hornblower (1717-1780) was also a Newcomen engine master, building and installing them in the tin mines. Joseph’s youngest son, Josiah Hornblower (1729-1809) also followed the family trade and indeed became a mining master. He travelled to North America in the 1750s to advise on copper mining and built with British parts, what some say was the first steam engine on American soil!

Before I mention the next generation, we must address a certain Mr. James Watt.

James Watt was born in 1736 in Greenock, a long way from the Southwest! But in 1754 he travelled to London to study instrument making.

Watt returned to Glasgow to work, repairing astronomical instrumentation and eventually opened a workshop manufacturing musical instruments, toys and various equipment and it was here that he first got his hands on a broken model of a Newcomen steam pumping engine. While repairing it he noticed the engine’s inadequacies and importantly, it’s inefficient use of steam. Watt developed the solution, the separate condenser and in 1765 he was able to demonstrate his breakthrough.

Funding the first full-size prototype was incredibly expensive, so this is where Matthew Boulton from the major Soho Foundry in Birmingham and his fat wallet enters the scene. Their partnership was a success and their first Boulton and Watt steam engine was complete in 1775.

With Savery’s patent long since expired, Watt was able to patent his ideas and financially benefit from it.

The Boulton and Watt engines made a 75% saving on coal in raising the steam, so the mine owners lapped them up. Importantly though, Boulton and Watt charged an additional license fee to the owners based on the coal saving made.

The company continued to develop their ideas by introducing double acting pistons, rotative motion, centrifugal governors and parallel motion to connect between piston and beam.

Watt died a very wealthy man in 1819 and the company continued to produce his engines.

And now we can introduce the Hornblower grandchildren.

Jabez Carter Hornblower (1744-1814) was Jonathan’s eldest son. He too became a Newcomen engine installer and went on to work for Boulton and Watt, building Watt’s engines too. He set up business with John Mabberley and built a new steam engine, but BOOOM, the might power of Watt’s patent saw it torn apart and poor old Jabez ended up in a debtor’s prison!

And finally, Jonathan Hornblower Jnr (1753-1815), youngest son of Jonathan Snr. He invented a compound steam engine in 1781, but his work was also successfully stopped by James Watt, who claimed it was his intellectual property.

Incidentally, the compound engine was successfully revived later on by the mighty Arthur Woolf!

There are several major contributors to the development of the early steam technology, but two more men need to be mentioned – William Murdoch and Richard Trevithick – they took the beam engines and gave us high pressure steam.

Another Scottish Engineer, William Murdoch was born in 1754 in Ayrshire. He initially worked as a millwright with his father, but made a bee-line for James Watt in 1777. In fact he walked 300 miles wearing a hand-turned wooden hat, which impressed Matthew Boulton so much that he was immediately employed.

He had an amazing career with Boulton and Watt and started there as a pattern maker. He was soon sent down to Cornwall to oversee the installation and repair of the engines in the Cornish mines. He became a master at tweaking the engines to increase their performance and so increased the revenues to the firm based on their dubious efficiency tax! Needless to say, Boulton and Watt loved him!

While keeping an eye on the ground for patent infringements for the firm, he had many original ideas of his own, which subsequently became the property of the firm. A major achievement was that of the sun and planet gear that achieved rotary motion by turning a drive-shaft.

Murdoch also invented the pneumatic despatch system and a door bell run on compressed air, iron cement, gas lighting and the use of steam to propel boats, but he was quite delighted by his steam carriage. It was a self-propelled steam road carriage – the first in Britain!

His employers weren’t in favour of this high-pressure steam and would not support him, so it was left to his neighbour – a Mr. Richard Trevithick to develop the steam road vehicle, but that’s another story!

So where can you see a surviving beam engine?

At the time of writing, there are 37 beam engines to be discovered on the GooseyGoo Industrial Explorer map. Just select beam engine in the By Category section on the map search and hit search.

Rather nice suggestions include:

The Levant Beam Engine

The engine at Strumpshaw Hall Steam Museum

Stretham Fenland Pumping Station

The original Newcomen engine in Dartmouth

The fantastic Elsecar Beam Engine

Markfield Beam Engine

East Pool Mine

Crossness Sewage Pumping Station

Coldharbour Woollen Mill

Claymills Pumping Station

Abbey Mills Pumping Station

Crofton Beam Engines

Goldstone Pumping Station

20th September 2016Maryann No commentsEngineers, Mining, Steam PowerSteam Engines

Hunslet Loco # 1215 – Restoration Update!

Hunslet 4-6- 0T number 1215 – progress report.

By Martyn Ashworth – Project manager – 31 st May 2016

Restoration of the ROD Hunslet 4-6-0 number 1215 tank is accelerating now as we head towards completion, steaming and launch, so here is a quick update and summary of where we are with it and of the critical path for completion of the restoration work.

See History of the Hunslet Loco # 1215 for more info HERE!

The loco 1215 has proved to be an interesting restoration project – there has been a high degree of conservation work required because of her originality, her history and her iconic status serving behind the allied trenches in WW1. Many of her components are stamped 1215, or 303 (her WD number) or even 37400, the original Hunslet batch order number from May 1916. 1215 will have to work for her living once she is operational again and she will have to be reliable in service, so this has meant that some quite drastic engineering work has had to be carried out some times and many old parts have had to be replaced with new ones because the old parts are worn out or cracked.

ALL the old parts have been retained and nothing is ever thrown away.

When 1215 came to our workshop it was relatively complete – the boiler had been removed from the frames and the Trustees had started to remove the very badly damaged cast iron block from between the frames at the front – this is essentially the smokebox saddle but it is actually much more besides and of all the items on 1215 that were badly damaged this was by far the worst. It is to the great credit of CIW of Coalville that they were able to recover this block for us and placing the heavily repaired casting back between the frames was one of the first milestones of the restoration finally achieved – but with many more to go.

We had a break from 1215 between about Christmas 2013 until August 2014 when we were all working flat out to complete work on our previous project – the restoration (rebuilding?) of Hudswell Clarke 0-6- 0WT “G” class number 1238 of 1916 for the Moseley railway Trust, so in all we have been at it for about four years now on 1215 which seems to be about right for this magnitude of job. Please bear in mind that this is only one or sometimes two days a week – we are all volunteers and although most of the team members are retired, many of us are not and a day job has to also be juggled with the commitment to restore these old locos.

I always work using a “Critical path” for any project and 1215 is no different, so our progress is mapped out and the next stages are always being planned for. I mark-off the key stages or “milestones” when they are met and it is always good to see the ticked off list of these growing – when they are all ticked-off it means we have finished and we can bring in the next project!

1. Re-wheel the chassis – DONE
2. Overhaul the bogie – DONE
3. Take delivery of new boiler – DONE
4. Complete work on pistons and valves –
5. Complete work on the springs – DONE
6. Complete work on the brakes – DONE
7. Complete work on the couplers –
8. Make up all new pipe runs –
9. Fit repaired bunker to loco – DONE
10. Fit repaired water tanks to loco – DONE
11. Hydraulic boiler out of frames – DONE
12. Steam test boiler out of frames –
13. Fit tested boiler to frames, inc ashpan and cladding –
14. Fit cab top to loco –
15. Complete all detail work on the loco, inc painting –
16. Steam test loco and trail runs

As of the end of May 2016 the volunteer team have put in the grand total of 10163 man hours working on this loco – this does not include all the time that Ian Hughes, myself and others spend doing all the administration and drawings etc for the project. So far we have put in 2470 hours in 2016.The AVERAGE team turn out every Tuesday is now 12 people with 5 people on a Thursday, so we are a very productive team!

For the technically minded some of the work still outstanding on 1215 is as follows;

Complete fitting the new air and vacuum brake systems
Complete the sanding gear – make and fit feed pipes from top sanding dome
Brass cab windows acquired – these need new safety glasses fitting
Drill the new cab front for the window hinges and pivots
Machine up one new ROSCOE Lubricator from castings
Machine up two new FURNESS lubricators from castings
Machine up two rear cylinder drain taps from castings
Fit the cylinder end and valve chest covers
Fit new cylinder cladding covers
Machine new main steam pipes – lower halves made of cored phosphor bronze with upper halves made of copper
Make a new ash pan and fit it to the boiler
Fit new expansion links, die blocks and pins
Couplings now fully over hauled – these can be fitted once the pipe work is all in place between the frames
New crinolines made and fitted to the boiler – new cladding sheets now being cut to shape and fitted
New clack boxes on order – LH one is on the boiler. RH one is due at the workshop shortly
Fit two injectors to the loco and make up new pipe runs to these
Fit cab top back on loco and new cab front and cross bracket
Fit the already clad boiler to the frames and pipe it up. Drill holes in the smokebox saddle and bolt the boiler down
Fit chimney and dome top cover
Paint the entire loco!

All of this costs money of course and we have been extremely lucky in that we have been supported by various grant making bodies over the last four years. We have also been greatly assisted by the Trustees and the many supporters of WOLT who have given generously to the project and to one patron in particular, who also helped us with the 1238 project with considerable financial assistance. This well known heritage railway benefactor has twice helped us with match funding us so for every pound we raised he matched us.

If anyone reading these notes has been thinking about helping the 1215 project with a donation, now is definitely the time to do so – the loco 1215 needs YOU!

The volunteer workshop team are absolutely determined to see through the restoration of this loco to full working order once more – now the new boiler has arrived on site the clock is ticking and we will be counting down to the steam test.

There is still much to do, but we have all of this work in hand and it WILL happen.

To find out more, visit the website of the War Office Locomotive Trust (WOLT) – www.warofficehunslet.org.uk

Contact details for Ian Hughes are: hughesi.460@btopenworld.co.uk and his phone number is 01887 822757 – (please leave a message – Ian will ring you back).

We urgently need extra funding now in order to see the job through to completion. WOLT is a registered charity and as such it is registered for gift aid. Gift Aid forms are available from the WOLT website or via Ian’s contact details above – this can further increase the value of a donation to the Trust by up to a further 25% and it comes from HMRC.

Thank You,

Martyn.

6th June 2016Maryann 1 CommentEngineers, Preservation, Railways, Relics, Steam Power, TransportationHaulage | Locomotives | Rails | Relics | Restoration

History of the Hunslet Loco # 1215

The 1916 loco – 1215 – is a very important and historic narrow gauge steam locomotive.

Our locomotive was built by the Hunslet Engine Company of Leeds to the order and technical specification of the British War Office for use on the light railways supplying the trenches of the Western Front. They were designed and the first locomotive of the class was completed in just over 3 months – a remarkable achievement for a relatively small manufacturer who was already committed to manufacturing gun making equipment for the War Office.

They had lost a large number of tradesmen to the various regiments raised in Leeds, eg the Leeds Pals, and as such now had quite a large number of female workers.

The British War Office had finally concluded by late 1915 that the original transport plans of requisitioned horses and road transport was unsuitable for the conditions that the front had by now degenerated into, but the majority of British manufacturing was already turned over to the war effort in preparation for the Somme offensive, which started on July 1st 1916.

The fact that Hunslet managed to produce over 90 of this type of loco before the war ended was a remarkable effort.

Unfortunately, this was not enough for the War Office, so they turned to the enormous capacity of Baldwins in the United States, who turned out no less than 495 of their similarly proportioned locomotives – of which a small number still survive.

Our Hunslet is notable in a number of ways. It is only the 3rd one of the type built and it was actually the 2nd one to leave the factory as part of the initial order (37400) for 10 locomotives!

The 1215 was dispatched on the 12th August 1916 to France, though we do not know exactly where it headed to first. It is, however, well recorded that the Hunslet 4-6-0s were used on one of the first lines officially operated by the British forces.

We are also incredibly fortunate that of the few survivors of the type, 1215 is the only one that has a photograph of it in service as in September 1917 – it was snapped at Boisleux-Aux-Mont to the south of Arras. It was later involved in a slight misdemeanour with some ballast wagons just north of Arras, but after this time we have little information of its further war office service.

Post war, the War Office attempted to dispose of all surplus equipment and thus in 1924, loco 1215 passed through the Hunslet engine works again for repairs and a slight re-gauge on behalf of the Engineering Supply Company of Australia, and halfway around the world it went to then enter service at the Bingera sugar mill near Bundaberg in Queensland. Here it stayed for many years, the limited availability of steel for replacement locomotives during the second war prompted rebuilds and 1215 received a new boiler from the Bundaberg Foundry. Come 1957 and diesel locos had been introduced at Bingera so 1215 was moved north to the Invicta Mill near Townsville where a number of items were transferred off the resident sister loco Hunslet 1226, which allowed 1215 to run for a further 10 years.

By 1967, 1215 had been withdrawn, and it was presented to the Rowes Bay Bush Children’s home in Townsville (a scheme established by a WW1 veteran officer) where it was to remain next to the sea for a further 27 years. In 1994 this scheme closed down and after some discussion the locomotive was sold to a Brisbane based enthusiast who dismantled it and made a start on its restoration.

Ten years later (although progress had been made) the owners circumstances had changed, and the opportunity for acquisition and a return to the UK became available. Once fund raising was complete and an export permit was obtained (on the second attempt) 1215 became the first of its type to be seen in Europe for 40 years, and in doing so we reckon it completed its circumnavigation of the world as it returned via the Panama canal.

The next eight years brought periods of display at LOCOMOTION the National Railway Museum at Shildon and at Apedale, as well as visits to the Hollycombe Steam Collection and the Leighton Buzzard Railway, before developments and fundraising allowed a start on restoration.

Restoration was initially in a small way by the Trustees, but agreement was then reached with the team, lead by Martyn Ashworth (of Heritage Transport Supplies), who were then working on Apedale resident Hudswell Clark loco number 1238 (also of 1916) at a well-equipped workshop adjacent to a private engineering works in South Yorkshire, to take the project forward.

To cut a long story short the last four years, since the loco 1215 left Apedale, have been a mix of excitement, head scratching, frustration and relief involving a vast amount of emails, letters, driving, filing, sanding, machining, cutting more head scratching, some nail biting, appeals for support and with relief, notes of thanks.

Balancing this is the immense satisfaction of having a brand new boiler being finished off in front of a wheeled, piped and painted chassis with every item on it in great order!

This satisfaction is not just for the Trustees and the volunteer team – it must also be shared with the many organisations and individuals who have supported the project so far from the larger ones such as the Heritage Lottery Fund, Arts Council (PRISM award), Statfold Barn Railway and Graham Lee, Garfield Weston Foundation, Foyle Foundation, Transport Trust, the Veronica Awdry Trust and our anonymous benefactor as well as the other individuals without whom we would never have reached the point we have.

However, there is definitely still room for others to share the satisfaction of completion as we push on to get the job done. So please help the team hit the target of returning 1215 to steam in her own centenary year.

Visit the website www.warofficehunslet.org.uk for more details.

6th June 2016MaryannComments OffEngineers, Preservation, Railways, Relics, Steam Power, TransportationHaulage | Locomotives | Rails | Restoration

A Happy Miller Indeed

I’m going to tell you a little bit about how I came to be a Miller.

~ by Karl Grevatt.

Before taking over Charlecote Mill, I worked within building conservation around Oxfordshire and Buckingham. I originally trained as a Carpenter but also worked using lime mortars. My interest in mills was sparked when I worked on Brill Windmill, not far from Bicester – it’s a small post mill and I was fascinated by it.

Following that I was lucky enough to be asked to apply for the William Morris Craft Fellowship, which is run by the SPAB (Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings) and I was selected to become a Fellow in 2009. The Fellowship is a unique course allowing crafts people, who work within building conservation to further their understanding and knowledge, try different skills and work with experts within their field. It’s spread over a year in two month blocks and gives you the opportunity to travel within the UK and work with crafts-people and experts within their field.

On my Fellowship I decided to concentrate on milling and millwrighting.

On my Fellowship I decided to concentrate on milling and millwrighting and spent some time with mills and millwrights around the UK. it’s then that I joined John Bedington for a week at Charlecote Mill. I was struck by how original and unspoilt the mill was and how traditionally it was run. There are only a handful of traditional mills left running commercially in the UK and I was amazed to see this one surviving so well. I went away from my time there contemplating what it would be like to be a Miller.

A year later (2010) I decided to become a trustee for the Fellowship and help support the course that had opened my eyes and introduced me to my future. I stayed in touch with John and went to help him at times on repairs and maintenance and when he said he was looking to retire, it didn’t take me long to jump at the chance. What an amazing opportunity to use my traditional skills, looking after one building. I also gain my own business and become part of the mill’s history – it was too good not to try!

It was about 2 years in the making from the initial decision to then becoming Miller.

In July 2012 I resigned from my job and went to shadow John for 3-4 months to learn from him and have a crash course in milling. I didn’t know if I was going to get to grips with milling, or running a business for that matter, but I officially took over the mill in October 2012 and I haven’t looked back since. I’m very lucky to be the custodian of Charlecote Mill, I love my job and spending my time looking after this amazing piece of working history. I thank John for his continued support and knowledge and I’m so lucky to have such supportive family and friends.

I’m a very happy Miller indeed! 😄

Karl Grevatt, Miller at Charlecote Mill – A Happy Miller Indeed

30th April 2016Maryann 2 CommentsMemoirs, Preservation, Processes, Relics, Water PowerMilling | Relics

Telling stories – the one that got away

In 1975 my brother and I took a holiday in Cornwall.

Not for a week on the beach at Newquay like most of the other men of our age, instead we elected to look at and photograph the legacy of the Cornish Tin Mining era.

We were into the hip cliché Industrial Archaeology

My brother had done the background planning, he had read a lot about Cornish mining, and was able to recognise most of the iconic engine houses in and around Camborne and Redruth. I was the up and coming budget photographer. To develop and print a roll of 36 exposure colour film in those days cost around £5.50; a week’s wages for me as a construction apprentice was £17.00.

We had a tent and a sleeping bag each, no camp bed or mat, and we spent an incredible week living on fish and chips. I was shooting in black and white, Ilford FP4, and would develop the films when home in our mum’s bathroom. She loved us to death – honestly!

Before we even set-up camp, we came across East Pool and Agar Mine at Taylors shaft. In those days you bought a ticket at East Pool Whim that gave entrance to the Cornish Engine house at Taylor’s shaft.

It was there we met John Bolt, a retired Cornish miner – a shaftsman. John was working as a volunteer for the National Trust, and would open the engine house on a daily basis. John seemed at first a little bit tired of the visitors. Static Cornish Beam engines and retired Cornish miners don’t say a lot to the casual visitor, they invite you to bring something to the party first – it’s a test!

However we did bring something to the party, our thirst for knowledge, the need to know about an industry that shaped the face of the country, we passed the test and the stories started and did not stop for a week!

John had worked in the Cornish Tin Mines all his life, when he retired he ran a chicken farm nearby, but John’s identity was that of a Cornish tin miner. Over the week in Cornwall, we would pop in and see John every day, where he would tell us remarkable stories of his life underground, right up until the mine eventually changed over to electric pumps in 1954.

John was a shaftsman who maintained the Taylor’s pumping shaft at East Pool Mine – all 1,700 feet to the sump at the bottom. He told us that on occasions, he had also driven the 90” Cornish beam engine, and could have been one of the last people to see it working. The normal Cornish beam engine driver was a young chap who can been seen at work on a BP archive film, John knew him well.

John told us all about the layout of the pump rods, plunger and lift pumps, clack valves and the 5 other underground balance beams. It would take him an hour or so to climb up the ladders to the surface. The Cornish engine has a beam weighing around 52 tons, yet when the command to ‘blow poles’ was given, the driver “could move that beam a quarter of an inch” John would tell us.

John told me the story of a miner who had become trapped by his hand, and after couple of days still could not be freed. A doctor was bought down the mine, to anaesthetise the guy. As John held him steady the doctor cut his hand off; John said “in about three seconds”. John said the guy was back at work a week or so later, and happened to come across his own hand after some blasting. The guy just casually picked up the hand, looked at it and said “look, a perfectly good hand, nowt wrong with it”. The guy put the hand in his pocket and took it home with him!

I made a further visit to East Pool and Agar mine the following year, and again was entertained by John Bolt. He was a guy I thought would be around forever, so in 1977 I did another trip to Cornwall, only to find John’s green Reliant car was not outside the engine house.

I enquired inside to a well-spoken BBC accented middle aged gentleman, who casualty informed me John had died in his sleep over the Christmas holiday. As you can imagine, I was gutted. My feeling arose not only from the news of John’s death, but because this loss was presented to me by this other person, as just the passing of another doddery old man. He clearly stereotyped John as someone well past their sell by date who had passed away, and had made way for a new up and coming intellectual who was really going to give the visitor experience a proper job well done.

He was not in the same race. He did not have the capacity to see that the world had lost a giant of a man whose depth of practical hands on knowledge reached back several generations and brought the past alive.

John’s name, along with a few others, is etched into the glass window on the first floor of the engine house – the one overlooking the entrance door. John’s name is right in the place he loved to be, in a Cornish tin mine engine house entertaining the visitors with his remarkable stories…. Well only the ones who were able to pass his special test!

I wish I had made a tape recording of John’s stories, but the retroscope has yet to be invented, so now, I am the keeper of John’s memories, and need to tell the stories myself…. I must devise a test!

You can tell me facts and I will learn, you can tell me the truth and I will believe you, but if you tell me a story it will remain in my heart forever.

Written by David Moore. Posted on February 17, 2016 by morturn on his blog site!

All images are copyright of David Moore.

David Moore is the Chairman of the Lichfield Waterworks Trust. Dave Moore’s association with history began inauspiciously. He was thrown off the History CSE course at secondary school for failing to show an interest and failing to hand in any course work. His working career started with an apprenticeship in the construction industry with an upward path leading to management in the private sector. Despite his worst efforts at school, Dave has always maintained his interest in history. He travels Britain widely in pursuit of his passion for industrial heritage and social history. Early retirement allowed Dave to deepen his interests by studying public history at Ruskin college, Oxford, for which he was awarded an MA. Dave’s other skills of photography, film-making and information technology support his work in the public history arena.

19th February 2016Maryann 3 CommentsEngineers, Memoirs, Mining, Processes

Essential Elements for Early Iron Smelting

When scouting for an area in which to establish a new iron smelting facility, early ironmasters asked themselves many questions –

Did the area have suitable topography for the construction of a furnace and its charging bridge? Was there a good and plentiful supply of water for turning a wheel? Were the surrounding landforms suitable for constructing water-control features, i.e., dams, canals, headraces, waterwheels, tailraces? Were there plentiful raw materials available in the area, i.e., iron-bearing ore deposits, fluxes, and wood for making charcoal? How could these supplies be brought in if local supplies ran out? Could the finished product be transported away easily? Was there an available labour supply? How would they get to the site? Where will the iron ingots be worked? Should a forge also be built onsite? What products was the grade of iron produced good for? Who has the expertise and experience to manage such a project? How will it initially be financed? It’s any wonder that they ever got off the ground!

The Iron Age occurred after the Bronze Age, so metallurgy was already known. But let’s not forget, we’re talking circa 900 BC onwards for Europe! (yes, that’s 1100 years ago). They needed to overcome the increased temperature required to smelt iron compared with tin and copper. And it was only in the 15th century that the introduction of the blast furnace really got the iron flowing!

Another important aspect of iron smelting is the carbon content as derived from the charcoal that it has to be burnt with. Only a small variation in the carbon content makes a big different to the hardness and therefore uses of the end product. Indeed it is the precise carbon content in the iron alloy that gives us steel! Less than 0.25 % is too little and over 1% is too much!

So in the beginning there were no blast furnaces and no coke (derived from coal). The metallurgists had to make their magic in bloomeries with charcoal, that they derived from carefully selected woodlands. Broadleaved trees were preferred because of their higher carbon content and because they produced a greater heat than coniferous trees. The size of the charcoal was also a major consideration. Charcoal larger than about 5 or 6 cms in diameter was too easily reduced to dust when transported or crushed by the weight of the furnace charge. Charcoal dust was most undesirable because it lowered the efficiency of the furnace. This served as an incentive to conduct cyclic coppicing of the surrounding woodlands, the evidence of which we can often see today! Charcoal was fragile and was too costly to be transported very far. The demanding charcoal needs of the ironmasters, coupled with that of the other glass works, potteries, and shipbuilding saw Britain’s forests rapidly dwindle.

Bloomeries varied tremendously, but a bloomery was generally a clay and stone kiln construction with a central chimney and an access hole at the bottom. The iron-ore was mixed with the charcoal and hand-bellows got the fire going. When the fuel was spent, the bloomery was emptied out and the spongy metallic lump of wrought iron and slag was recovered.

As time went on, much was learnt about the fuel and temperature variations based on the emerging product. Water-powered bellows soon replaced the hand operated ones and the bloomeries were made taller. Soon a ramp was required to fill the furnace and careful layering of products was employed. Mistakes were costly, both in time and materials, so I should think lessons were learned quickly and knowledge closely guarded.

The iron-ore and charcoal was added to the furnace via the hole in the top in alternating layers of carefully considered thickness! This kind of knowledge was passed on from ironmaster to apprentice and learned from experience not out of a book!

If a furnace was blown out or extinguished, it had to be rebuilt, causing a one-or two-month delay before high-quality iron could again be made. Therefore, it was imperative that the iron-smelting production process was not disrupted.

But the Chinese were well ahead of the game and were already using a continuous kiln at a higher temperature that was able to drive-off the oxides and liquify the iron. It was recharged at the top with iron-ore, limestone flux and charcoal and molten iron and slag were tapped-off separately at the bottom.

Introducing the blast furnace!

It was introduced to the Weald in 1491 or 2, but despite the arrival of the blast furnace in the 1490s, bloomeries were still operating in the West Midlands region beyond 1580. And in Furness and Cumberland, they operated into the early 17th century! The last one in England (near Garstang) did not close until about 1770.

Waterwheels, bellows, blast furnaces, and the continuous melt!

Blast furnaces were the new fashion. The well-known bloomery was being replaced with the more permanent and larger blast furnaces, with waterwheel-driven bellows and charging ramps.

The monks cottoned on quickly and blast furnaces were thrown up at Abbeys such as Tintern and centres such as the Forest of Dean and Ironbridge emerged.

The technology didn’t change drastically until 1709, when Abraham Darby of the Coalbrookdale Co in Ironbridge introduced Coke (a form of coal) as a fuel in place of charcoal. This allowed the size of furnaces to physically increase, because charcoal collapsed under the weight. So improved were the results that coke was almost universally adopted within 100 years.

Another improvement was that of pre-heating the blast air. It was achieved by using heat recovered from the exhaust gases. This enabled the temperature within the furnace to remain uniform and high!

Amazingly, (apparently) you can tell from the texture and colour of the slag whether or not a furnace had a hot or cold blast!

They also pre-mixed the coke and iron-ore and roasted it, producing sinter. This helped to drive-off impurities and improve the iron product.

All in all, a proper job!

15th December 2015Maryann No commentsProcesses, Water Power