|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 9:49:22 GMT -5
NCB Pits! 1947 958 1957 822 1968/9 317 1972/3 281 1973/4 259 2005 maybe half a dozen private pits Manpower 1947 704,000 2005 A handful! OMS in cwt ( for the young 'uns, thats hundred weights, 112 pounds) 1947 21.5 1957 24.9 1968/9 42.5 1972/3 45.8 (affected by national strike) 1973/4 42.3 (affected by national strike) Coal Face Productivity. 1960 4800 faces 158 tons per day 230,000 men 80cwt face OMS. 1967 1674 faces 500 tons per day 140,000 men 119 cwt face OMS. 1969 966 faces 590 tons per day 108,000 men 113 cwt face OMS 1972/3 830 faces 615 tons per day no men figs available. 149 cwt face OMS.
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 10:55:59 GMT -5
Would that 112 pound be in Sterling or US gallons? (I only ask as a young 'un). In an attempt to confuse even further, an American ton and English ton are both made up of 20CWT, but an American ton is 240 pound lighter than its English equivalent, is this because American coal is heavier?
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 12:12:37 GMT -5
Would that be the sort ton, long ton or metric ton Daz Standard ton is the same Daz, 16ozs to the pound, no stone here, cwts mentioned but rarely used. 2240lbs to the ton, thats the "long" ton, 2000 is the "short" ton or commonly known as the metric tonne..
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 12:17:39 GMT -5
Ah that must be the answer then John, the fact that there is no stone in the American coal ton (International short ton), English coal, when it was produced nearly always contained some stone and therefore would obviously weigh more.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 12:21:24 GMT -5
We used to sell our coal in Australia in metric tonnes Daz, mind you it was cleaner coal than UK coal too..
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 12:28:38 GMT -5
Ahha, another factor springs to mind now, if the standard cubic yard of English coal produces approximately 1 ton (imperial) of coal then a cubic metre would provide a heavier ton I suppose; I think that a cu yard is equal to 46656 cu inches and a cu metre would be approximately 60698 cu inches which would then make the English ton the shortest I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 12:34:17 GMT -5
Now your confusing me Daz! Remember, I'm pit trained and only work in shears
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 12:37:51 GMT -5
Well in an attempt to further confuse can I ask; Would Australian coal be lighter than coal mined in the UK as a result of the shallower seam depths, i.e. would the greater depth of cover and therefore compressive forces acting upon the formative coal serve to produce a denser coal in the UK?
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 12:41:57 GMT -5
The one's I worked in had well over a 1000 feet of cover over them, so can't comment. I don't know whether you noticed when you'd been down an Oz pit, but the coal is "cleaner" in as much as I never got as dirty! None of the "mascara" I used to get in UK coal Daz!
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 12:55:05 GMT -5
In much the same was that a ton is a variable quantity I would with respect suggest that an electrician's definition of dirty is somewhat different to that of working miners, a sort of Sparky's Short Smut. Cosmetic values are something that I had not taken into consideration I must admit. At 1,000 feet of cover we would have considered that to have been a Day Hole in Yorkshire. (Good to have these aka demic discussions on here)
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 13:02:39 GMT -5
A lot of the seams in and around Nottingham were around a 1000 feet Daz, the Hazles, Main Bright etc. Deep hard and Deep soft south of the River Trent were over 2000 feet deep, including the Piper, and a couple more seams near the lower extent of seams. The River Trent being in a large fault cutting across the county.
But I used to get far dirtier in UK seams than I did in Oz seams..
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 15, 2005 15:06:34 GMT -5
Sorry about all the kidding there John regarding the comparative values of tons..................I was joking honest. The variation in coal cleanliness is another matter, I fully accept that what you are saying about some coal dust being much more difficult to remove in the bath than another as being true although in the past Australian laws that no no-one worked outbye of coal production may well have influenced some of the variation. The dirtiest coal that I ever worked amongst was in Colorado at the Mid Continent mines, after a few days experience on the face I took to coating every exposed part of my body in Vaselene prior to going underground, otherwise it was practically a couple of hours scrubbing with a wire brush in order to get clean. The cleanest coal must surely have been that produced by Barnbrough Colliery in the 1950's which was destined for use at Buckingham Palace, piece by piece, cobble by cobble the coal was handwashed before being filled into white bags for despatch to London by Royal Appointment I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 15:21:02 GMT -5
I heard a rumour they whitewashed it Daz. She was shocked first time she did the Royal visit "dahn pit" Bloody stuff were different colour!!
Rules in NSW was no person was allowed to work in the returns side of a longwall production unit while it was cutting. Didn't prevent anyone working on the tailgate side of the shearer, just from working in the returns.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 15, 2005 15:23:28 GMT -5
I dug out my old copy of the "Coal Mines Regulation Act" sometime back, they were superceded in the 80's with a more uptodate version. One law forbid the use of profanity at a colliery!!! "Oi, now stop that or I'll bloomin well call you a name" Hmmmmm, wonder why it never worked
|
|
|
Post by dazb on Apr 16, 2005 2:27:12 GMT -5
"One law forbid the use of profanity at a colliery!!!"
MINING PROFANITIES; I consider that I was lucky be have been brought up in the Barnsley pits where swearing of any kind, blasphemous, chauvinistic and other type of offensive or profane declarations were never present and would certainly have been frowned upon by the Gentlemen Management. I do however appreciate that other mining regions were not always as pious in their declarations and descriptive comment. These are a few that I have actually witnessed; Confusing Rugby Union with Rugby League in a Glasshoughton pit bottom conversation. Stating that an AB 16 haulage top cover that trapped a fitter’s finger was “Inertly Illegitimate”. Describing to a canteen lady that her tea was to be likened to the fluid waste of a senior female occultist. Being asked to work Saturday night shift. Calling a new undermanager Cock or Luv or MeDuck or Mate. Telling the man in the next stint that you can’t understand why he is sweating. “No Manriding” notices on trunk belts. “Bunker’s full”. “Belt’s brok” “Shearer’s stood” “Sorry the wages are late again” Naked and filthy armed only with a towel, a bath-key and sixpence being told by the bath attendant “Sorry no soap left”.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 16, 2005 8:23:00 GMT -5
I recall a district Overman by the name of Charlie Watchorn, I knicknamed him "Screaming Charlie Watchorn" Now he added a new dimension to profanities! I was just a young impressionable apprentice then and he taught me swearwords even my Dad had never heard (Especially if the belts stopped.)
|
|