Why THIS Double Track?

[DaveBrt]

In April, 1864, there was considerable discussion about the need to double track the South Carolina RR from Augusta to Branchville. The work was never approved or done, but I am wondering why THIS particular piece of track was a candidate for such treatment when no other track in the Confederacy was double tracked. Thoughts?

 

[UCVRelics]

I would think that between the massive production facilities, CS powder works and the canal there may have been a need for double tracks.

 

[Waterloo50]

I would think that between the massive production facilities, CS powder works and the canal there may have been a need for double tracks.

That would make sense, there was an increase in demand for tobacco and cotton plus a regular passenger service, I guess the double track would allow both freight and passenger trains to pass which had the obvious benefit of keeping things moving. I'm just wondering if the double track was more of a passing loop, I'm not sure what the American name is for a (passing loop).
Just looked it up, in the USA it's known as a 'hole' or a crossing loop.

 

[DaveBrt]

The President's and Superintendent's reports in the January 1, 1864 Annual Report give no indication of needing double tracks. They have received 12 miles of light T rail from the Government to repair the worst of the track on that division and have rented 6 locomotives from the Memphis & Charleston RR, but the reports are filled with concerns of failing rails, lack of engine wood, lack of cars, and the difficulty in keeping this division operating because of floods. This division was so busy that the road was unable to maintain regular schedules and procedures.

The reports sound like the road needed heavy track and more manpower to supply wood and to maintain the track and bridges/trestling.

My interest is peaked because this division must pass its traffic north/east to another division, but additional capacity is not mentioned for the next division (Branchville to Columbia).

 

[Waterloo50]

The President's and Superintendent's reports in the January 1, 1864 Annual Report give no indication of needing double tracks. They have received 12 miles of light T rail from the Government to repair the worst of the track on that division and have rented 6 locomotives from the Memphis & Charleston RR, but the reports are filled with concerns of failing rails, lack of engine wood, lack of cars, and the difficulty in keeping this division operating because of floods. This division was so busy that the road was unable to maintain regular schedules and procedures.

The reports sound like the road needed heavy track and more manpower to supply wood and to maintain the track and bridges/trestling.

My interest is peaked because this division must pass its traffic north/east to another division, but additional capacity is not mentioned for the next division (Branchville to Columbia).

Wasn't there a problem with the ties rotting away, also some of the rails sinking, was there a problem with wet ground or was it more to do with lack of ballast?

 

[DaveBrt]

Wasn't there a problem with the ties rotting away, also some of the rails sinking, was there a problem with wet ground or was it more to do with lack of ballast?

The answer was: yes to all.

 

[dgfred]

Easier to turn the few engine units around??? Just a wild guess.

 

[Waterloo50]

Easier to turn the few engine units around??? Just a wild guess.

Over here in Britain our steam engines could run tender first, I guess it would have been the same in your neck of the woods. I guess a double track wasn't so much about the which way in which a locomotive was facing but more about keeping the traffic moving. It's an interesting point that DaveBrt raised about increasing performance on the Augusta to Branchville but not Branchville to Columbia. I don't know much about the topography of that area but I imagine it must have been full of inclines and rivers and probably a challenging place to build a railroad. If a double track had been built on the Augusta to Branchville stretch of track it would have been a bit pointless because there would have been a bottle neck from Branchville onwards.

 

[DaveBrt]

And the next curious fact is that the president of the Charlotte & South Carolina RR (which had a terminus in Columbia) was in the process of creating a company to lay a track from Columbia to Augusta on the air line. The road had been subscribed and about 25 miles were graded during 1864, despite the great shortage of labor. The road was actually built right after the war. The Columbia & Hamburg RR would have been almost the exact same distance as the Augusta to Branchville division. The existing route required another 65 miles from Branchville to Columbia, so the air line was much shorter.

The South Carolina RR had not been built from Columbia to Augusta direct because its purpose was to funnel all traffic to Charleston to support that port.

 

[Carronade]

Wasn't there a problem with the ties rotting away, also some of the rails sinking, was there a problem with wet ground or was it more to do with lack of ballast?

The answer was: yes to all.

A lot of the problem was drainage. There should be ditches on both sides of the track, and they should be kept clear of debris so that rainwater can flow away from the tracks. As noted, wood ties sitting in wet dirt will rot (had they yet started treating ties with creosote etc?). Trees and vegetation should also be cut back, especially on the south side of the track to allow sunlight to help dry out the ground. Ties with good ballast and drainage will last a long time, and the support they provide is just as important (or more so) than the size and strength of the rail itself. This is all labor-intensive, and it requires space; I don't know about the CW era specifically, but single-track rights-of-way came to be about 66' wide (80' for double track).

 

[DaveBrt]

A lot of the problem was drainage. There should be ditches on both sides of the track, and they should be kept clear of debris so that rainwater can flow away from the tracks. As noted, wood ties sitting in wet dirt will rot (had they yet started treating ties with creosote etc?). Trees and vegetation should also be cut back, especially on the south side of the track to allow sunlight to help dry out the ground. Ties with good ballast and drainage will last a long time, and the support they provide is just as important (or more so) than the size and strength of the rail itself. This is all labor-intensive, and it requires space; I don't know about the CW era specifically, but single-track rights-of-way came to be about 66' wide (80' for double track).

The footprint for CW track (ditch-bed-ditch) was 50 feet, about 65 feet for double track. Ties were not treated until about 10 years after the war, though the concept was understood much earlier. Southern ties lasted about 5 years, with 20-60,000 needing to be replaced every year on many roads.

 

[Lubliner]

In April, 1864, there was considerable discussion about the need to double track the South Carolina RR from Augusta to Branchville. The work was never approved or done, but I am wondering why THIS particular piece of track was a candidate for such treatment when no other track in the Confederacy was double tracked. Thoughts?

Maybe due to Branchville being a midway point between Charleston and Augusta, that could be a clue to why. Also, wouldn't any type of addition be a bond-raising issue, where investors would determine it's outcome? Branchville was supposedly named for being the beginning point for a railroad branch, but I can't find when this came to pass, nor which direction the rail went.
Lubliner.

 

[DaveBrt]

Maybe due to Branchville being a midway point between Charleston and Augusta, that could be a clue to why. Also, wouldn't any type of addition be a bond-raising issue, where investors would determine it's outcome? Branchville was supposedly named for being the beginning point for a railroad branch, but I can't find when this came to pass, nor which direction the rail went.
Lubliner.

The South Carolina RR branched north to Columbia and west to Augusta at this point. Financing the double track was not being discussed yet, but the Confederate solution to other such projects (excepting the Piedmont RR) was for the government to loan the RR the money against a mortgage against the RR. The note was paid back by crediting a portion of the government's bill for transportation against the balance.

 

[Lubliner]

Augusta was a navigable river so also a cargo point. Branchville seems to be almost dead-center between Columbia, Charleston, and Augusta, and Savannah, Georgia. I can see why Branchville could be determined as an important way stop. So an idea was floated to double track the single that already existed? "Bite off a little at a time"; economics possibly.
Lubliner.

 

[Rebforever]

I was surprised at seeing a double track from Waynesboro to the tunnel atop the Blue Ridge Mountain.
A Union Officer by the name Gillespie, made a map Of Waynesboro Battlefield and shows a double track.
And I remember a turn table that was used regularly.

 

[Lubliner]

Economic feasibility and necessity seems to be odd for such a proposal at this stage of the war. Judging from how the administration of railroads was conducted, they had to be looking at long-term profits for an uncertain future. They could have contemplated the 'first come, first served' argument for future progress. The main depot at Branchville wasn't built until 1877, a year after reconstruction, by the Southern Railway. The rebuilding of other rail line connections during this period after the war may provide a clue, @DaveBrt .
Lubliner.

 

[DaveBrt]

Economic feasibility and necessity seems to be odd for such a proposal at this stage of the war. Judging from how the administration of railroads was conducted, they had to be looking at long-term profits for an uncertain future. They could have contemplated the 'first come, first served' argument for future progress. The main depot at Branchville wasn't built until 1877, a year after reconstruction, by the Southern Railway. The rebuilding of other rail line connections during this period after the war may provide a clue, @DaveBrt .
Lubliner.

The proposed double track was being urged by the Quartermaster Department and the Engineer Bureau (mid-rank officers in both cases), not the railroads.

 

[Lubliner]

Odd proposal. Most movements at that point would certainly be for the quickest way between points 'A' and 'B'. Branchville is in the middle of nowhere.
Lubliner.

 

[DaveBrt]

Odd proposal. Most movements at that point would certainly be for the quickest way between points 'A' and 'B'. Branchville is in the middle of nowhere.
Lubliner.

And so you see the reason I asked the question in the OP.

 

[Lubliner]

I used up all my hypotheses. How to use 'benefit of the doubt' concerning their rationality is not forthcoming.
Lubliner.