LMR: A relatively unknown 1st Class Carriage

[What About The Bee]

Liverpool Albion 27 July 1829

"The first-class vehicle has a long body, the middle being like the body of a coach , and the two ends (the whole length being built in one) like two chaises."

James Walker, An Accurate Description of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, 1830.  

"The most costly and elegant contain three apartments [sic], and resemble the body of a coach (in the middle) and two chaises, one at each end, -- the whole joined together."

Liverpool Albion, 14 June 1830

"...some have a central compartment which will contain six persons with seats before and behind, and two other compartments, one in front and one in the rear, each of them resembling a postchaise, with windows in front, and containing only three persons."

What is a Chaise?  It is the name of a horse drawn carriage, an image of one follows.  Note the single bench with all passengers seated in one direction, and the enclosed front.

And now, the image of this carriage from the first edition of Walker!  

This image does not appear in subsequent editions. You will note the featured item was the Water Street Bridge.  This impressive bridge survived into the 1900s and we have photographic evidence of the LMR's feat of architecture

The center compartment is the one we commonly see.  Yet if you examine this closely, you will see that it has two chaises, just as the written descriptions indicate!  The carriage is pulled by a Rocket Class locomotive, complete with a generation one, barrel tender.  The chassis for this carriage will be very short indeed, perhaps 12 feet or so, with the center compartment at 5 feet, the chaises at 3½ feet each.

Hornby does know how to make a chaise ended carriage, the Queen Adelaide Royal Saloon (R40357 and R40437) has one, albeit with seating for only two, not three as above.  So maybe?

Hint Hint Hornby!!

Bee

[What About The Bee]

The LMR was given permission to establish its station on the far side of the Irwell River from Liverpool, in Manchester instead of Salford.  Those in charge in Manchester were worried about the railway blocking two important causeways:  The Irwell River and Water Street. 

The Irwell Bridge was a typical stone arch bridge.  Nothing beyond the ordinary.  Yet the Water Street Bridge was beyond ordinary.  This was a cast iron girder bridge!  17 feet clearance under the bridge.  4 tracks wide. 

Crane provides us with a period view of the Bridge from the departures side.  The locomotive you see is headed towards Liverpool, with the building on the right the departing passenger terminal.  The Arrival-shed is on the opposite side of Water Street, hidden by perspective. 

The Manchester Evening News published a photograph of the bridge on 26 Aug 1904.

 

A 1905 photograph of the bridge.

I normally include images, but this may actually still be under copyright, so you just get a reference.  Two are provided, in case one goes down.

Best view of the image here
https://www.lookandlearn.com/history-images/XH164964/Water-Street-Railway-Bridge-Manchester-built-1829

Fairbain is the 1829 beam engineer
https://prestwich.org.uk/history/people/fairbairn.html
Image in article

[LY shunter]

 As it was in April 2016 photo taken from under bridge into freight  yard the far bridge is the line into Piccadilly now replaced by a new bridge as it was cast iron.  Second photo is from under bridge to Piccadilly showing Stephenson bridge over river Irwell ,the cast iron pillar in far distance is line into freight yard

[LY shunter]

29 minutes ago, LY shunter said:

 As it was in April 2016 photo taken from under bridge into freight  yard the far bridge in third photo is the line into Piccadilly now replaced by a new bridge as it was cast iron.  Second photo is from under bridge to Piccadilly showing Stephenson bridge over river Irwell ,the cast iron pillar in far distance is line into freight yard

 

[gilbo2]

Always interesting reads @What About The Bee, thank you. I'm really taking a liking to the Era1 rolling stock, even for my clumsy hands 

[What About The Bee]

Thank you @gilbo2.  I sometimes worry that my mutterings are boring the crowd to tears.  It is nice to hear that some correspondents find these informational posts interesting.  

Hornby Head of Development said it best: The period is filled with interesting and unique solutions to problems.   

Nothing was resolved, everything was up for debate.  I read an interesting (to me anyway 🤷‍♂️) 1834 paper on the benefits of cylindrical wheels, as compared to the conical wheels that are now well accepted practice.  Under his certain class of restrictions, yes, but in general, no.  He spoke extensively of superelevation, so he was on the right track.  Ha!  

I'm hopeful that Hornby finds the Era as lucrative as we find it fun.  That they continue to produce new and interesting models.  Fingers crossed!

Bee

[What About The Bee]

@LY shunterThe infrastructure along the right of way of the LMR is fascinating to me. 

One of the benefits of the Ordnance Survey maps is the ability to find that infrastructure in the modern world.  Some of it is gone, of course, unable to withstand the pressures of modern encroachment.  Yet, traces are still visible, some traces larger than others.  

Thank you for the images.  

Bee

 

[What About The Bee]

Why would they tear down a perfectly viable bridge?  The Water Street Bridge was standing in 1905, 75 years after construction.  To the modern eye, nothing is more common than these flat bridges with steel beams.  They are a well accepted solution.  Economical too.  So why was the Water Street Bridge removed?

The answer is 'graceful degradation'.

Steel and cast iron have differing material properties.  The modulus of elasticity defines the force required to bend an object.  As an object bends, it hits two important values, yield and ultimate yield. The relationship is the critical difference.

When yield is close to ultimate yield, then the material breaks soon after it bends.  There is little elastic deformation. It is brittle.  Examples of this are glass.  Glass can bend, but not much before it shatters.

When yield is well under ultimate yield, the material bends and bends, but does not break.  An example of this is copper, which can be folded back on itself, 180°.

So back to the bridges.  Steel will bend and bend.  It degrades gracefully.  Yet cast iron is brittle, when it bends, it breaks.  

So even though the physical form of the two bridges may be the same, the one of cast iron will be the one with catastrophic failure.  The steel bridge will deform under load, the cast iron bridge will collapse under load. 

Eliminating cast iron bridges to replace them with steel was prudent.

Bee

[threelink]

Hello Bee. What you describe as your "mutterings" are never boring - quite the reverse. You are right about OS maps but where possible nothing beats a site visit with the Mark 1 human eyeball, even after the demolition men have been in. My son and I are ardent amateur industrial archaeologists (fancy term for two blokes who like ferreting round old mills factories mines and railways) and over the years we have stumbled across some fascinating bits and pieces that have survived unrecognised and unmapped (like the remains of a Newcomen atmospheric engine at the site of a long demolished Warwickshire brick/ cement factory, fencing along ex-GWR branch lines manufactured from lengths of broad gauge bridge rail, most of the component parts of a steam powered rope hauled waggonway system at a long abandoned Derbyshire limestone quarry and even a WWII German Jumo lightweight diesel aero engine from a bomber shot down in 1939 on a Norfolk beach). It is astonishing what survives out there if you know where to look. When I eventually manage to retire I have every intention of subjecting any accessible parts  of the L&M to minute scrutiny to see just what now remains.

Keep up the mutterings, please

threelink

[What About The Bee]

Hello ThreeLink

First hand exploration is superior, no disagreement.  There is the minor impediment of the Atlantic Ocean holding me back!

Here is one perfect example of use of the Ordnance Survey maps.  I found a tunnel through the railway embankment on the 1849 survey.  I then correlated it to the modern maps, and with a name, found a picture.

And now you can visit it too!  A genuine piece of LMR infrastructure.

Bee

[Rana Temporia]

Pre-covid that road through Glazebury was part of my almost daily commute!

There is a lot of interesting archaeology around central Manchester connected with the railways, rivers and canals. In the River Medlock just up from Pin Mill Brow, there are the remains of the pillars railway bridge in the bed. The area there was used by Manchester to win sand from the river, and most of the flagstones in the city centre were laid on that sand, going down past Piccadilly Station towards Oxford Road there is a car park at the back of the Lass o’Gowrie pub where you can just about see the top of an arch. That used to be navigable up to near Manchester Piccadilly (or London Rd) station and coal was brought up in barges from the canal system. When the link to the Medlock was severed near Deansgate Station, the Medlock began to silt up and the current bed level is around 4 to 6 feet above where it used to be.. The Medlock flows in a siphon below the Deansgate canal basin and emerges on the other side of the Youth Hostel there. 

There are several good books, there is one called the lost rivers of Manchester which is highly sought after and commands a very high price being long out of print, but you can ask your library to get a copy. there are also a couple of Underground Manchester books available. 

The river Irk flows in a culvert beneath Manchester Victoria station and emerges into the Irwell near the School of Music. The Irwell used to be navigable to the sea via the Mersey and any excavation in central Manchester will produce vast quantities of Oyster and Winkle shells which were used as food for the masses, being brought up from Liverpool. The construction of weirs stopped all that! The Irwell now joins the Manchester Ship Canal being directly connected to it, and from Media city it’s easy to sail right up to the large hotels in Central Manchester. I’ve done it in a RIB and the architecture is amazing seen from the river. 

Making use of the old OS maps so much more becomes visible and obvious in a lot of cities, including why some buildings are odd shapes, they were often built up to railways or rivers which may now have gone. Rivers do go, they get diverted or culverted and some of those in Manchester (and elsewhere) became sewers. Some rivers run in large pipes, there is one in London over a railway station and the Roch flows in a cast iron pipe above the railway north of Littleborough. 

[What About The Bee]

I would like to add a few observations about this particular first class carriage.

1  The sentence structure in the Liverpool Albion, of 1829, reveals that this may actually be the first 1st class carriage to ride on the LMR.  "The first class vehicle..." implying that was only the one, or one type.

2 Imagine how socially awkward this must have been.  With two of these in a row, you will be able to observe the person in the other carriage, but not engage in verbal communication.  My goodness!  Staring at someone for the entire journey would simply be awkward!

3 The very short carriage (12ish feet) was consistent with the short waggons of the time.  It is entirely possible that a waggon carriage was pressed into service for this construction.  

4 Transforming the chaise ends into full compartments added 6 fares for a modest increase in length.  Perhaps the heavy demand for seats and the increased rewards of 3 full compartments forced these out of service rapidly. 

5 This carriage type is reported in the Liverpool Albion, in 1829.  The Wapping Tunnel opened just a few days later.  Perhaps this carriage was built to show to the hundreds, if not thousands, who toured the tunnel what was to come.

Bee

[LTSR_NSE]

2.  err… am having incredible difficulty imagining any ‘social awkwardness’ involved in such a situation! 🤷‍♂️

As I have lived within 30 miles of London all my life, my entire experience of public transport has involved dutifully observing ‘Tube etiquette’** ! 😂

** for anyone who is unaware of this custom - it requires absolute avoidance of:
• eye contact with
• speaking to
• interaction of any kind with
fellow passengers! 🫣🤐   😉😂

[What About The Bee]

Hi LT&SR_NSE 

For the front chaise compartment facing the engine crew, it must have been a phenomenal experience.  Imagine yourself in the front chaise, and as in the Walker image, the tender and locomotive directly in front of you.

Watching the engineman at the controls and the fireman at work.  In an age when steam locomotives were the leading edge of technology, it must have been the equivalent of watching a pilot control the space shuttle.  A marvel before your eyes.

And since this was first class, you would see the panorama of the railway rushing towards you, around you, with only a brief stop at Parkside.   Best seat in the house, the LMR probably could have charged extra!  

You may very well be right about Tube Etiquette alleviating awkwardness.  Yet... there were no distractions.  It was impossible to read in a stagecoach. Several reporters marveled over being able to read on a railway carriage, because it was so novel an experience.  Staring at the floor for the 3 to 4 hours it took from Liverpool to Manchester by fast stagecoach would be dull.  Fast stagecoach required horse changes and the speed of the changeover was a competitive point amongst companies.  You could take the slower coach, the horses weren't driven so hard and the horses were not changed.  It was cheaper.  Just took a dogs age to finish the journey.  

I suspect they chattered to each other to relieve boredom on stagecoaches.  Tube Etiquette may not have developed by the inception of the railway.  Of course, I could be dead wrong about this.  I claim no special knowledge about passenger behavior in the 1830s.

Bee

Edited March 13 by What About The Bee
I thought a phrase needed a tweak!

[threelink]

Hi, Bee. I take your point about the Pond. So far as concerns social awkwardness, I am sure that a few discretely arranged chintz curtains would have dealt with the issue.