I don't really think of the B&A as serving areas rich in mineral resources
|
Claus Schlund \(HGM\)
Hi List Members,
Please conside for a moment the nice shot of a B&A hopper at the link below: http://www.ebay.com/itm/121728597734 I have always wondered about these B&A hoppers. I don't really think of the B&A as serving areas rich in mineral resources - so what was the original intent when the B&A acquired these hoppers? Thanks in advance. Claus Schlund |
|
|
|
Benjamin Hom
Claus Schlund asked: Please consider for a moment the nice shot of a B&A hopper at the link below: http://www.ebay.com/itm/121728597734 I have always wondered about these B&A hoppers. I don't really think of the B&A as serving areas rich in mineral resources - so what was the original intent when the B&A acquired these hoppers?" B&A 25144 from B&A 25000-25499, Lot 597-H built in 1929 by SSC, 500 cars. Instead of large-scale rail movements, coal shipped to New England tended to travel by water, then carried by rail from the ports inland. B&M, NH, and B&A maintained small fleets of coal hopper to cover this traffic. The late Tim Gilbert had posts on the list years ago describing this traffic. These B&A cars are examples of a unique NYCS prototype - it's essentially an offset analogue to the 39 ft IL USRA triple, though built in far smaller numbers (2500 offset vs. 13,800 USRA triple hoppers). Still trying to figure out how to model this car - the variety of short taper offset triple/quad hopper models in HO scale isn't much, and those available offer significant obstacles (Athearn quad - wrong number of side posts, prototype splice plates are in different locations, change from quad to triple; MDC triple, side posts are incorrectly located, side sill is too deeper, hoppers are too shallow in profile, overall crude model). Ben Hom |
|
|
|
Mark Hemphill
Water-borne coal unloaded on Boston docks and hauled inland would be a big reason for B&A having hoppers. My Coal Age traffic maps from the 1940s of coal movements out of Appalachia show most of it heading straight to tidewater or lakes, then into a barge or ship for coastwise movement up and down the Atlantic seaboard. Similarly, anthracite coal was a major component of the coal market in Wisconsin, upper Michigan, upstate Minnesota and eastern North Dakota, moving backhaul in ore boats on the Great Lakes. Even today, coal wants to get into a barge or boat or ship as soon as possible; the railroads I've worked for shipped considerable western coal to places like Cahokia Marine in East St. Louis, to travel in some cases as few as 50 miles on a barge to a power plant. And yes, get a better rate doing that too.
Other reasons for B&A hoppers: limestone, trap rock, aggregates, sand. I'm thinking that if you pulled up the ICC annual report for the B&A in any STMFC year, there would be a substantial tonnage in aggregates as well as coal. Mark Hemphill |
|
|
|
riverman_vt@...
I am far more inclined to agree with your second paragraph than your first, Mark, as I cannot recall any
coal unloading facilities on the Boston & Albany in Boston. There may have been something in East Boston on the Grand Junction line that the Boston & Maine foolishly did not purchase when they had the opportunity but, if so, it must have disappeared prior to WW II. Let us not forget, however, that after 1900 the B&A was little more than another appendage of the NYC. While perhaps not a large originator of coal traffic I think we need to recall that the NYC did originate some coal traffic in both western Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Unlike coal carried by other larger coal carriers I'm going to suggest that a larger percentage of NYC coal traffic traveled from the mine to the destination wholly by rail than that of any other carriers with the possible exceptions of the D&H and NYO&W. As an NYC subsidiary it seems only natural to me that the B&A's own hoppers would have been used in such service as well as aggregate and other such service. The B&A did serve some quarries on its own line as well. The largest of these was probably the New England Lime Co. in Renfrew, Mass. (not a town but a P.O.) on the branch to North Adams, Mass., a company that had its own switching operation powered by Shay locomotives. Lastly, look at the stenciling on the car cited. Looks to me like it was limited to use within the State of Ohio at least during the period in which it was photographed. Cordially, Don Valentine |
|
|
|
Don Valentine writes:
"While perhaps not a large originator of coal traffic I think we need to recall that the NYC did originate some coal traffic in both western Pennsylvania and West Virginia." And in Southern Illinois. Not traveling to New England [ or Old England for that matter ] but, rather to the Great Lakes. Mike Brock |
|
|
|
Mark Hemphill
Now I'll have to paw through the files in the garage and see what I can find. Good project for tomorrow :)
Mark Hemphill |
|
|
|
---In STMFC@..., <brockm@...> wrote : Don Valentine writes: "While perhaps not a large originator of coal traffic I think we need to recall that the NYC did originate some coal traffic in both western Pennsylvania and West Virginia." And in Southern Illinois. Not traveling to New England [ or Old England for that matter ] but, rather to the Great Lakes. Mike Brock Open top hoppers have been used for sand & limestone for glass making. They've also been used for hauling salt. Andy Jackson Santa Fe Springs CA |
|
|
|
Mark Hemphill
My apologies in advance if I'm violating forum rules, as this post has nothing to do with modeling steam-era freight cars, and pertains solely to what some of those cars were used for. Source: Bituminous Coal Movements in the United States, Walter H. Voskuil The Geographical Review 32: 117-127 (1942) Summary: In 1937, the relevant U.S. Fuels Administration Market Areas in the northeast were 1 and 2, Market Area 1 consisting of eastern New England and Market Area 2 consisting of western New England and portions of the Mid-Atlantic states. Market Area 1 included Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. Bituminous Mining Districts 1 through 3 and 6 through 8 supplied coal to Market Areas 1 and 2 in 1937. Mining District 1 was mostly central Pennsylvania, 2 was mostly western Pennsylvania, 3 was mostly northern West Virginia, 4 was eastern Ohio, 5 was central Michigan, 6 was the Wheeling, West Virginia, area; 7 was mostly southern West Virginia, and 8 was far western Virginia and eastern Kentucky. The quantity in tons by method of transportation was: Mining District Market Area 1 Market Area 2 District 1 All-Rail: 569,659 10,190,733 District 2 All-Rail: 70,553 3,202,118 District 3 All-Rail: 125,240 5,067,066 District 6 All-Rail 0 59,758 District 7 All-Rail 6,056 293,102 (low-vol) District 7 All-Rail 0 606 (high-vol) District 8 All-Rail 51 7,436 (low-vol) District 8 All-Rail 4,548 417,284 (high-vol) Districts 7&8 Tidewater 11,743,783 7,232,196 (via Hampton Roads) Districts 1,3&8 Tidewater 145,055 0 (via Philadelphia) Districts 1&2 Tidewater 144,579 0 (via New York) Districts 1,2&3 Tidewater 0 101,893 (via New York So you can see that the overwhelming tonnage of bituminous coal to Market Area 1 is tidewater via Hampton Roads, whereas Market Area 2 is about 2.5 tons all-rail for every ton tidewater. As for anthracite, Market Areas 1 and 2 in 1937 consumed approximately 5.000,000 tons anthracite. (It also consumed 40,931,000 bbls of fuel oil, the equivalent of 10,230,000 tons coal.) Quoting from the report, "Except for the anthracite obtained by all-rail haul from Pennsylvania, the eastern section of New England (Market Area 1) is supplied almost exclusively by producing districts 7 and 8, in Virginia, West Virginia, and eastern Kentucky, by rail-tidewater haul." How that coal got off barges, schooners, and whatnot in New England ports, and made its way to the consumer, I do not know. But I think some substantial quantity had to be loaded back into gons and hoppers? It's hard to imagine that 12,000,000 tons were all consumed immediately at dockside or within a wagon or truck haul of dockside, compared to 800,000 tons delivered all-rail presumably to all the hinterland towns and cities. I suppose it's possible that the coastal area of New England was all tidewater bituminous supply, whereas the entire remainder of New England was all-rail, but the numbers don't seem encouraging to that hypothesis. The same article also covers Lake Cargo movement of coal (and says, interestingly, that Indiana and Illinois coal could not compete with eastern coal in the Great Lakes ports and were limited entirely in 1937 to local markets and interior points of southern Wisconsin and Minnesota); all-rail westward movement of coal to markets in the upper Mississippi River Basin, and the Chicago coal market. Mark Hemphill |
|
|
|
Marty McGuirk
Mark, Very interesting summary - thanks for sharing. It's always fun when someone throws facts on an argument around here. Though in reviewing your submission I do find the description of the geographic break-down of New England and the definition of the two Market Areas a little strange. "Market Area 1 consisting of eastern New England and Market Area 2 consisting of western New England and portions of the Mid-Atlantic states. Market Area 1 included Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine."
I'm not surprised to see the relatively high percentage of tidewater coal that arriving by barges. There were several large coal bunkers located along the coast of Connecticut that transshipped coal from barges to hopper cars - I had an aerial photo of one in one of my Getting Real columns in an early issue of MRH. A number of coastal Connecticut towns had towboat companies that utilized ocean going tugs and barges - the Thames Towboat Company comes immediately to mind. Many of the coal-burning power plants in southern New England were (still are) located along the coast of Long Island Sound or just inland on one of the many rivers along that coast line. For example, a large power plant at Montville had railroad tracks entering the plant but as far as we can tell coal was delivered exclusively by barge via the Thames River. In more recent times the tracks were used to ship flyash from the plant - I'm not sure if it would have been shipped out in the era covered by this list. It is also true, however, that there was considerable aggregate traffic in and around the New England area which may be the primary reason the B&A rostered hopper cars. |
|
|
|
riverman_vt@...
Hi Mark,
I'm pleased to have the info from the report you found but it also raises some important questions of interpretation. You write that Market Area #1 includes "eastern New England and Market Area 2 consisting of western New England and portions of the Mid-Atlantic states. Market Area 1 included Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine". This needs some serious clarification as Vermont is the most western of all New England states but seems to be included in Market Area #1. Just what parts of Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut does this report feel are in "Market Area 2"???? Perhaps it might be better to inquire as to exactly what parts of which New England states are supposed to be considered as "Market Area 1". I would expect everything along the coast east of New London, CT, all or Rhode Island, Massachusetts east of the Connecticut River, most if not all of New Hampshire and all of Maine. But in spite of the statement that "Market Area 1 included Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine" I suspect none of Vermont and not all of New Hampshire were actually included as this would contradict what "Market Area 2" is stated to include unless some area were included within BOTH market areas. I am extremely doubtful that any significant amount of coal destined for Vermont and several points in northern New Hampshire was actually transported even part way by water. If it were it would have required more hopper cars than were owned by the Rutland or Central Vermont to move it. Hopper cars from the Pennsy, B&O and D&H in particular were commonly seen in northern New England with fewer numbers from roads such as the Pittsburgh & Shawmut, Lehigh Valley, L&NE, L&HR, NYC and even the large and more southern coal roads like the C&O and N&W were seen but less frequently. Working from north to south the BAR had three coal unloaders at Searsport, Me. that were more than adequate to provide tide coal to satisfy the needs of northern Maine. Some ten years ago Sheepscot Scale Models George Barrett and I were fortunate enough to witness them all still in operation, though they are now gone. Our only regret is that we did not have a video camera because it was a site to behold. Further south in Maine the MEC unloaded ship borne coal in Portland but I do not know if the Grand Trunk also did. Coal cold also be unloaded in earlier years at Portsmouth, NH, Salem, as well as Boston, Mass., all on the Boston & Maine, which did have a sizeable fleet of twin and quad hoppers for the purpose. I do not believe that either the New Haven nor the B&A unloaded coal in Boston but believe the New Haven did in Providence in years past. Further down the coast I do not know about and am not going to guess. Hopefully you can determine the Market Areas a bit better as that would be a great help. Cordially, Don Valentine |
|
|
|
So ... since this doesn't include anthracite coal, I assume this is
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
only a fraction of the coal being rail hauled into New England states? Are there any other coal classifications besides bituminous and anthracite? Were there any coal burning power plants located away from water transport in New England in this era? Tim O' Bituminous Coal Movements in the United States, Walter H. Voskuil |
|
|
|
Marty wrote
> It is also true, however, that there was considerable aggregate traffic in and around > the New England area which may be the primary reason the B&A rostered hopper cars. I have wondered whether in the STMFC era whether railroads that RECEIVED a lot of traffic of a certain type also supplied cars for the off-line originators of that traffic in order to ensure a good supply of cars for their customers. After all a home road car that is loaded off line earns per diem while it picks up a load, and once the car is back online, the owner doesn't have to pay rent on it while the customer takes their time unloading it ... Certainly by late STMFC era this was not an unusual practice. The Rock Island supplied airslide hoppers to the SP to be loaded with cane sugar in California for customers on the Rock Island -- just one example. Tim O'Connor |
|
|
|
Marty McGuirk
Time wrote: "I have wondered whether in the STMFC era whether railroads that RECEIVED a lot of Central Vermont rostered 200 twin-bay hoppers. Based on circumstantial photo evidence the majority of them seemed to spend a fair amount of time on the southern end of the railroad around New London - no surprise as their were several large gravel operations. They may have been used to deliver coal to company coal loading points but the overwhelming number of photos of the coaling towers show B&O and (sometimes) PRR hoppers on the dump tracks. But Tim's question brings up an interesting point - but I've never seen any evidence of any of the CV's hoppers being loaded in the coal fields. Would be interested if that was the case since it would at least validate the hypothesis. Marty McGuirk |
|
|
|
Mark Hemphill
I found a better map of the market areas. The one I had last night was a really poor xerox.
Market Area 1 included Maine, the eastern 1/3 of New Hampshire, the eastern 1/2 of Massachusetts, all of Rhode Island, and the eastern half of Connecticut. Market Area 2 included the remaining portions of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, all of Vermont, New York state east of Rochester, all of New Jersey, all of Delaware, the eastern 2/3s of Pennsylvania, and the eastern 3/4 of Maryland east of approximately Cumberland. It also included all of Canada (!) east of roughly Kingston, Ontario. With that better information in hand, and just looking at the tonnages, the question remains how much coal showed up on the New England seaboard in a coastwise barge or schooner, and was reloaded into a hopper or gon for inland movement. From my experience with rail pricing and marketing of coal, and considering how rates worked in the regulated area, and from my experience with car supply and how railroads think about that, in Market Area 1, within 50 miles of the seaboard, my though is that there was virtually no coal arriving all-rail, and that the market was almost exclusively supplied by tidewater coal originating on C&O, N&W, and VGN mines and some anthracite also moving rail-water, that was either consumed right at dockside, loaded into trucks or wagons for local delivery, and trucks for up to about a 50-mile range. Beyond 150 miles, from the seaboard, I would expect that the market was almost exclusively supplied by all-rail coal, much of it originating at NYC-served mines. (I can't imagine that the Pocahontas roads would ever encourage all-rail moves to Market Area 1; they'd lose the hopper for months at a time when they could instead cycle it multiple times to Hampton Roads.) In between, my thought is that the coal supply tended to be all-rail coal in the summer months when there was ample car supply, and tidewater coal delivered by either truck or rail in the winter months. That is, in the summer, when NYC had surplus cars, they would fulfill orders for coal moving to New England, and in the winter, when there was high demand on their own lines, they would only fulfill car orders for coal moving captive to their own lines. I would be surprised if a New England road had purchased coal equipment to cycle to a mine on someone else's road -- at least, they probably wouldn't have made that mistake twice, because the cars would have been sent out to empty on their maiden trip and probably never would have been seen again. Despite what is often said about per diem incentiving railroads to return foreign cars promptly, railroads frequently stole other railroad's cars and never gave them back, particularly if they had a car shortage for their own customers. The per diem cost was small compared to the forgone revenue of not moving a load. (The eastern railroads in the 1950-1980 time frame were particularly fond of never returning western road boxcars that arrived with lumber loads; they were car-poor because much of their equipment was by the 1950s junk that the customer would never accept. The ICC Finance Reports have a lot of fuming about that particularly by SP.) It's one thing to supply cars to an originating railroad when the commodity and O-D pairs are so weird and the originating railroad has no other use for them, but when it's a plain unequipped car, good luck. (Today, it's a big reason why a customer who needs a plain boxcar, covered hopper, or gon in a regular service that originates on one Class 1, and terminates on another Class 1, is much better off leasing its own cars than hoping the originating railroad will provide a system car.) Background to where Market Areas came from: The Bituminous Coal Act of 1937 "was to establish minimum prices and maintain a "cost-floor" under the sale of bituminous coal at the mine so as to improve the position of the industry and enable it to pay the wages and meet the terms of employment arrived at under collective bargaining. The Act thus provided for the establishment of a minimum price structure for bituminous coal which would return to producers an income equal to their costs less capital charges." (Source: Minimum Price Fixing in the Bituminous Coal Industry, Waldo E. Fisher and Charles M. James, Princeton University Press, 1955) The key document that might answer this (and my copies are buried in one of 500 boxes): The ICC Annual Statistics of Steam Railways of the U.S. These should show the carloads of coal originated by the roads. Mark Hemphill ---In STMFC@..., <mjmcguirk@...> wrote : Time wrote: "I have wondered whether in the STMFC era whether railroads that RECEIVED a lot of Central Vermont rostered 200 twin-bay hoppers. Based on circumstantial photo evidence the majority of them seemed to spend a fair amount of time on the southern end of the railroad around New London - no surprise as their were several large gravel operations. They may have been used to deliver coal to company coal loading points but the overwhelming number of photos of the coaling towers show B&O and (sometimes) PRR hoppers on the dump tracks. But Tim's question brings up an interesting point - but I've never seen any evidence of any of the CV's hoppers being loaded in the coal fields. Would be interested if that was the case since it would at least validate the hypothesis. Marty McGuirk |
|
|
|
Armand Premo
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The Rutland had some 100 hoppers and discontinued
sending them to the mines in 1934.Armand Premo
|
|
|
|
Dave Parker
I actually have pulled the paper. The methodology is not spelled out, but the map (Fig 2) suggests that the author adopted a rather unorthodox definition of "New England" . District 1 includes ME, RI, ~1/2 of NH, and a predictable division of MA and CT (i.e. at the Conn. River). District 2 seems to include VT, the rest of MA and CT, about 3/4 of NY, 2/3 of PA, all of NJ, and good chunks of DE and MD. So, not really New England as presently defined. As to what the paper really says, I cannot say until I have a chance to fully digest it. Dave Parker Riverside, CA |
|
|
|
Armand Premo
The Berwind was also a major supplier for
Vermont.Armand Premo
|
|
|
|
np328
I supplied data in the past on the other end of the lake. See the posts of 65627 and 65630 for that data. This also gives classes of coal and where it came from. This (these posts) covers the Northern Pacific. And then.... figure that the GN, the SOO Line, the CNW/Omaha, the Milwaukee Road (trackage rights over the NP since 1925 Twin Ports/Twin Cities) "also carried about an equal amount of tonnage". Before anyone jumps on that last phrase, I base that on a letter from one of the coal companies in Duluth to the NP sales traffic department that stated (to paraphrase) - we feel that you, the NP, get your fair share of this traffic. I talked this over with Jerry Masters who worked on the NP in the upper offices and he agreed that it was a proper assumption that everyone of the above got a pretty equal share - as that was the best way to both fend off the salesmen, and make sure shipping prices were the best that could be got. The lake coal traffic off the lake, was so great that from a 1930 NP report, The Report on Open Top Cars, it stated that this one area of traffic was the determinant in what type of hopper or gon the NP should purchase. And an additional 1939 update came to the same conclusion. This road with the vast lignite reserves out in Montana. And yes, in the reports within the NP I have read, there was competition from the Milwaukee, the M&StL, the Q, and the IC to try and make inroads into the Twin Cities market. The comment that Mark H made about eastern cars going off line. I need to find and post the Service Orders for returning coal cars to their owners. They must have enough for there to be return home restrictions placed.
Jim Dick - Roseville, MN |
|
|
|
np328
Tim O' writes - Are there any other coal classifications besides bituminous and anthracite? From a 1930 Fireman's manual: There was super anthracite - very hard pure carbon with very little impurities. anthracite bituminous sub-bituminous lignite sub lignite - low carbon, high impurities. There was additional information given on each type, carbon content and impurities, moisture content. Coke was listed as coked sub bituminous. Sales prices of all coals were based on BTU content. Jim Dick - St. Paul |
|
|
|
Jim Mischke
B&A ribbed and offset side hoppers could be found far from home in dedicated service seemingly unrelated to B&A. Example from 1965-1974: J&L Steel opened a new iron ore mine called Adams at Kirkland, Ontario in early 1965, ore destined to steel mills at Cleveland, Aliquippa and Pittsburgh. Routing was Ontario Northland - Canadian National - Canada Southern - P&LE. Hopper cars were contributed in proportion to mileage. Later in this service, B&A hopper cars were involved, possibly to cover the NYC/P&LE share. I would speculate that one can find pre-1960 examples of NYC subsidiary roads serving the system in service other than for what they were acquired. |
|
|