What Does The Word Terminals Mean Regarding a Railway Line?

[Andy873]

I'm struggling to understand what the word "Terminals" means when describing a railway line?

One internal BR letter dated December 1963 which is a proposal to close the branch line I'm researching has in it the financial section of the report under the general heading Savings, there are three columns (Actual, Consequential and Total savings), and three items listed, they are 1. Movements, 2. Terminals, and 3. Track and Signaling. Items 1 and 3 I understand but not 2.

The Line Manager (Manchester) who compiles this report says there are no "Terminals" on this branch line, but over £2,000 will be saved on consequential savings (not on this line) from terminals - What could a terminal be / mean please?

 

[stuving]

This does appear to be standard transport and logistics jargon - you may be able to find a reference work on that. Of course the railways usage of the time may not be exactly what's common now for other modes.
Terminal costs are the fixed costs of a journey, working or whatever that is called. In that case movement costs would be the costs that depend on the distance, or more generally where the working went. So all the costs of assembling the train, loading, preparing the traction, etc, are terminal costs. While I doubt they would be completely fixed for all origin/destination pairs, they might be close enough for that be make sense as an accounting practice.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Terminal typically means a freight facility or passenger station where traffic terminates (or originates) on a railway. E.g. container terminal or steel terminal. Probably refers to BR-owned terminals rather than private sidings because if they go, BR won’t have had any internal, unremunerated costs to save.

There may be facilities off the line that are only required for it, such as a run-round loop or bay platform. If a line goes, so can they.

 

[Rescars]

This does appear to be standard transport and logistics jargon - you may be able to find a reference work on that. Of course the railways usage of the time may not be exactly what's common now for other modes.
Terminal costs are the fixed costs of a journey, working or whatever that is called. In that case movement costs would be the costs that depend on the distance, or more generally where the working went. So all the costs of assembling the train, loading, preparing the traction, etc, are terminal costs. While I doubt they would be completely fixed for all origin/destination pairs, they might be close enough for that be make sense as an accounting practice.

I wonder how Andy873's £2000 was calculated. Was this just a "thumb in the air" estimate, or a more accurate figure based on the actual number of activities undertaken (or more accurately not being undertaken) with standard charges for each item? It seems unlikely in a paper-based world for all the variable costs to have calculated with total precision, but there may have been offices full of clerical officers armed with calculating machines to carry out just this sort of exercise. Others no doubt know more.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I'm struggling to understand what the word "Terminals" means when describing a railway line?

One internal BR letter dated December 1963 which is a proposal to close the branch line I'm researching has in it the financial section of the report under the general heading Savings, there are three columns (Actual, Consequential and Total savings), and three items listed, they are 1. Movements, 2. Terminals, and 3. Track and Signaling. Items 1 and 3 I understand but not 2.

The Line Manager (Manchester) who compiles this report says there are no "Terminals" on this branch line, but over £2,000 will be saved on consequential savings (not on this line) from terminals - What could a terminal be / mean please?

I'm puzzled by the concept of a branch line 'having no terminals'.

Unless it's a link between two routes (which pedantically isn't a branch line) it must had have a terminal at its end, even if there were no terminals along the route.

Freight locations were divided between 'yards' and 'terminals'. As has been pointed out above, 'freight terminal' meant where traffic originated from or was consigned to. Would attract costs at the location itself and also serving it - for instance, travelling shunter.

 

[Andy873]

Thanks for the replies, very helpful.

Freight locations were divided between 'yards' and 'terminals'. As has been pointed out above, 'freight terminal' meant where traffic originated from or was consigned to. Would attract costs at the location itself and also serving it - for instance, travelling shunter.

And thanks for clarifying the point.

Terminal typically means a freight facility or passenger station where traffic terminates (or originates)

It appears these terminals are Blackburn and Rose Grove. By the end of 1963 there were just two freight trains running Mondays - Fridays, one starts at Blackburn and calls at two stations and terminates at Rose Grove, the other comes from the other direction and terminates at Blackburn. Now these two stations are taking coal deliveries but under the coal concentration scheme, one station's coal will move to Blackburn and the other station's coal will go to Burnley, hence the savings on terminals.

This does appear to be standard transport and logistics jargon

Yes, in the end this does appear to be the case!

I wonder how Andy873's £2000 was calculated. Was this just a "thumb in the air" estimate, or a more accurate figure based on the actual number of activities undertaken (or more accurately not being undertaken)

Good question, when it comes to these consequential savings we are largely left in the dark and BR are vague about them.

What I can say is under consequential savings for movements and for terminals, both have a figure of £2,100 each plus 700 for a sub ganger from a nearby line making consequential savings of £4,900. It seems BR could add in any old expense but wouldn't acknowledge valid other income.

Where was the Burnley coal concentration depot? If it's not at Rose Grove then there can't be a complete saving.

 

[Dr Hoo]

At Burnley the coal might have been handled alongside other traffic at the Manchester Road depot. Not every facility that continued to handle wagonload coal was a concentration depot with hopper, conveyor and so on. Some places were still served by traditional mineral wagons, even into the 1980s.

 

[Gloster]

The Liverpool & Manchester Railway Atlas (Brown, Crecy, 2021) states ‘Goods (07.10.1968 [this is the closure date] became Coal Concentration Depot (07.10.1968-10.08.1970)’. A look at the relevant 1:2500 map (Revised:1958 to 1967, Published: 1970) suggests strongly that the depot was on the west side of the line in the northern part of the yard, with this part of the yard called Daneshouse (bounded by Oswald Street and Brougham Street).

EDIT: According to An Illustrated History of BR Hopper Wagons (Monk-Steel, HMRS, 2022) it appears that the Burnley depot was called Burnley Danehouse and was operated by British Fuels.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Some great research there @Gloster . Nevertheless, a life of less than two years, 1968-1970, suggests that this wasn’t a major investment or ‘hopperisation’, rather just a (lower case) ‘concentration’ of coal traffic from some nearby locations.

 

[Gloster]

One other possible meaning for Terminals struck me: could it refer to sidings or other facilities off the the line that are required for traffic to or from it? For example, it might be that at Rose Grove two sidings are (nominally) allocated to holding traffic to or from your line. If the line is closed then they are no longer required and their maintenance and renewal costs cease, or at least can be shoved onto another department’s books.

 

[Merle Haggard]

/snip

EDIT: According to An Illustrated History of BR Hopper Wagons (Monk-Steel, HMRS, 2022) it appears that the Burnley depot was called Burnley Danehouse and was operated by British Fuels.

Does inclusion in that book that not imply it was hopper discharge? Or was the book more general?

The combination of local clean air regulations and the availability of North Sea gas for central heating (town gas works didn't have the capacity) caused a rapid decline in household coal traffic that was probably not foreseen. All those 21t VB Hoppers overhauled, repainted bauxite & carrying HOUSE COAL CONCENTRATION lettering came and then disappeared again quite quickly. Hoppers for coal were rare outside the North East before that.

I wonder how Andy873's £2000 was calculated. Was this just a "thumb in the air" estimate, or a more accurate figure based on the actual number of activities undertaken (or more accurately not being undertaken) with standard charges for each item? It seems unlikely in a paper-based world for all the variable costs to have calculated with total precision, but there may have been offices full of clerical officers armed with calculating machines to carry out just this sort of exercise. Others no doubt know more.

My bold

There would probably be a 'rationalisation' or 'forward planning section', the division I worked in it had 3 staff. Trying to cut back resources as traffic fell away. Wagon load freight traffic levels late 60's - early 70s fell off a cliff. The optimists thought some would come back, 'V' graphs were the fashion on BR at the time.

 

[Dr Hoo]

British Fuels was only incorporated in 1975 according to the Internet, whereas we’re considering 1968 (and Burnley supposedly closed by 1970). Curiouser and curiouser.

 

[Merle Haggard]

British Fuels was only incorporated in 1975 according to the Internet, whereas we’re considering 1968 (and Burnley supposedly closed by 1970). Curiouser and curiouser.

I can't remember that name, 'P D Fuels' (P D = Powell Duffryn*) and Charringtons were the ones I do remember. I think I remember that Charringtons appeared as lettering on hoppers. A few others whose names I can't recollect operated just one depot - there was one near Luton on the MML for instance.

A BR stations and terminals book of the period would be very useful!

* Unsure of spelling

 

[Gloster]

Does inclusion in that book that not imply it was hopper discharge? Or was the book more general?

The introductory chapter that it is in is about the use of hopper wagons and House Coal Concentration depots that used such depots. The mention of Burnley in a list strongly implies that it was for hopper wagons.

British Fuels was only incorporated in 1975 according to the Internet, whereas we’re considering 1968 (and Burnley supposedly closed by 1970). Curiouser and curiouser.

It is possible that British Fuels only applies to the next entry (Rawtenstall) and that if it applied to both Burnley and Rawtenstall there would have been an ‘and’ between the two, not a comma. However, that would mean would there is no operator listed for Burnley, unlike all the other locations in the list. The gazetteer entry in Brown’s atlas for Rawtenstall says that the Coal Concentration Depot opened there in 1964 and passed to British Fuels on 02-05-1966.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Having dug out a 1976 TOPS Location Handbook I note that Burnley Daneshouse CCD was listed as British Fuels. So were Blackburn King Street and Rawtenstall.

 

[6Gman]

My understanding is that in costings and budgetary terms terminal costs are the costs incurred in standing still rather than movement costs which are the costs of moving.

So terminal costs are the cost of buildings, the staffing of them etc as opposed to movement costs of providing locos, wagons, fuel & maintenance, staffing etc.

 

[Andy873]

The Liverpool & Manchester Railway Atlas (Brown, Crecy, 2021) states ‘Goods (07.10.1968 [this is the closure date] became Coal Concentration Depot (07.10.1968-10.08.1970)’. A look at the relevant 1:2500 map (Revised:1958 to 1967, Published: 1970) suggests strongly that the depot was on the west side of the line in the northern part of the yard, with this part of the yard called Daneshouse (bounded by Oswald Street and Brougham Street).

EDIT: According to An Illustrated History of BR Hopper Wagons (Monk-Steel, HMRS, 2022) it appears that the Burnley depot was called Burnley Danehouse and was operated by British Fuels.

That's truly superb, thanks very much fir that. The dates tie in very nicely with Padiham goods depot closing 17 June 1968.

Having dug out a 1976 TOPS Location Handbook I note that Burnley Daneshouse CCD was listed as British Fuels. So were Blackburn King Street and Rawtenstall.

Blackburn King street was where the coal traders frpm Gt. Harwood had to go.

One thing I don't understand is the British Fuels connection with these depots? Did they lease space from BR? was the term CCD a more general term for a place? Did BR sell the depots to British Fuels etc?

 

[Gloster]

That's truly superb, thanks very much fir that. The dates tie in very nicely with Padiham goods depot closing 17 June 1968.


Blackburn King street was where the coal traders frpm Gt. Harwood had to go.

One thing I don't understand is the British Fuels connection with these depots? Did they lease space from BR? was the term CCD a more general term for a place? Did BR sell the depots to British Fuels etc?

As far as I can see the private companies operated the CCD, which was on land owned by BR, although it might have been rented out to the operator; it is not clear who owned the unloading and processing machinery. The coal was delivered by BR in wagons owned by it, even though some had company names on the side. Coal Concentration Depots were, I am fairly sure, specifically those updated location with mechanised handling of coal delivered in hopper wagons; the term did not apply to ordinary yards where traffic from a number of closed yards was transferred to.

A further bit of delving suggests that the reference to British Fuels refers, as suggested by @Dr Hoo, to the situation in 1975. This then leads to the assumption that the depot at Burnley, and those at Blackburn and Rawtenstall, were opened by another company. It also appears that the 1970 closure date for Burnley in the atlas is wrong.

 

[Andy873]

As far as I can see the private companies operated the CCD, which was on land owned by BR, although it might have been rented out to the operator; it is not clear who owned the unloading and processing machinery. The coal was delivered by BR in wagons owned by it, even though some had company names on the side. Coal Concentration Depots were, I am fairly sure, specifically those updated location with mechanised handling of coal delivered in hopper wagons; the term did not apply to ordinary yards where traffic from a number of closed yards was transferred to.

Thanks for the explanation.

The coal traders at Padiham then could only have gone to two possible places, Burnley Daneshouse or Burnley Central. Burnley Manchester Road was closed, Burnley Barracks couldn't have accomodated them, and Rose Grove only had four short coal roads for its coal traders. Burnley Daneshouse looks to be the place they went.

One fact some of you might find interesting is the coal trader's reaction to being told the branch is closing and they will be transferred elsewhere. The sole trader at Simonstone threatens to transfer to road, and some of those at Harwood (BR were not sure what percentage) are also threatening to do the same - transfer to road. If this was typical of the country as a whole, I wonder how much profitable coal traffic was lost despite coal traffic declining?

 

[6Gman]

Thanks for the explanation.

The coal traders at Padiham then could only have gone to two possible places, Burnley Daneshouse or Burnley Central. Burnley Manchester Road was closed, Burnley Barracks couldn't have accomodated them, and Rose Grove only had four short coal roads for its coal traders. Burnley Daneshouse looks to be the place they went.

One fact some of you might find interesting is the coal trader's reaction to being told the branch is closing and they will be transferred elsewhere. The sole trader at Simonstone threatens to transfer to road, and some of those at Harwood (BR were not sure what percentage) are also threatening to do the same - transfer to road. If this was typical of the country as a whole, I wonder how much profitable coal traffic was lost despite coal traffic declining?

I suspect very little coal traffic to local traders was profitable by that stage.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Bearing in mind that wagonload coal lost money hand over fist from before Dr Beeching’s Reshaping report through until 1991 when the Speedlink network was finally closed I’m not clear what ‘profitable’ traffic was being lost. Especially if trying to keep it would require retention of short branch lines and occasional dedicated trips solely to serve small wayside merchants.

 

[zwk500]

One fact some of you might find interesting is the coal trader's reaction to being told the branch is closing and they will be transferred elsewhere. The sole trader at Simonstone threatens to transfer to road, and some of those at Harwood (BR were not sure what percentage) are also threatening to do the same - transfer to road. If this was typical of the country as a whole, I wonder how much profitable coal traffic was lost despite coal traffic declining?

I suspect that if BR had kept the branch open for them, both traders would have gone to road anyway within a few years.