algy Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 This machine, called the soil transporter, was a huge construction which carried material extracted by a dredger into waiting wagon on the banks of the canal. The transporter was designed and constructed by John Price of Grappenhall, Cheshire, who was agent for the six lower sections of the Canal. The navvies working on the Manchester Ship Canal were able to purchase refreshments, such as coffee and tea from various providers. One such source was this converted boat, which appears to have been called 'Noah's Ark'. It is pictured here on the river bank with some of its customers posing at the top of the steps. Here we can see the early stages of the construction of Northwich Road Swing Bridge, Stockton Heath, crossing the Manchester Ship Canal cutting. This photo confuses me as an earlier photo (bottom) shows the bridge in place and navvies excavating beneath it?, - algy. Old Manchester Racecourse - the site of No9 Docks. Two navvies working on the bank one with a hook in place of his amputated hand. Original Railway Swing Bridge on Dock No6. Partington New Railway Station. FORERUNNER OF THE PRESENT DAY "CANAL TRIP". The passenger steamer 'United States', seen here berthed at Trafford Dock, belonged to the Manchester Ship Canal Passenger Steamer Company. The Company offered sailings along the Canal to Liverpool. Large numbers of visitors came to see the construction of the Canal and the finished waterway. Dock workers queue up to receive their pay at the Salford Office of the Manchester Ship Canal Company. An advert above the payment hatch lists the services available from the Salford Dock Mission. In the background can be seen a locomotive called 'Weaver'. Thomas Walker, the contractor, owned several locomotives and railway wagons which were used on the temporary railway system. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 Algy.... re the stockton Heath bridge photos.... in the first one; without the bridge, the depth of the excavations don't look as deep as they do in the second photo; when the bridge was in place. Could it be that they excavated to a certain depth, built the bridge and then excavated deeper afterwards perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.