Sun 27 Sep 2009
This Chapter details the efforts of Katoomba Colliery Limited, the Company which re-opened the old Colliery in 1928.
Herewith some maps found in the State Archives
212640 A 1931 map of early streets of West Katoomba. Many of the streets in Por 62 are now in Katoomba Golf Course.
The second map is a Blackheath Parish Map with the holdings of J B North and his son J G North outlined in Red and the holdings of The Australian Kerosene and Mineral Company Co Limited hatched in red.
3255 Is a partial scan of an undated surveyors map of the Southern section of the Katoomba Workings, it doesn’t correlate very well with the Mines Dept maps of the same area!!
The third document is a surveyors sketch of the Scenic Railway incline. It shows a total drop of 680.70 feet on a distance of 777.68 feet an average incline of 43 degrees 23 minutes. It records the steepest part as 50 degrees and 15 minutes.
More comments from Stan Johnstone:
116 Explanation of the reason for ” slack coal “. It had nothing to do with roof support.
Reply from PH.
P116 I also am concerned with this one. The original remark came from Ralph Bennett’s paper on Katoomba Colliery. It seems illogical to me that you would separate small coal from large with a fork, then use the small coal inside a pigsty to hold up the roof!
More from Stan:
120 I think there must have been further improved versions of bulk hoisted skips. I think I saw a rapid dumping ” alligator ” there in 1939 (but there is no mention of one).
Reply from PH:
P 120. I am not familiar with the term “alligator”. The skip used to haul the coal to the top in the 30’s and 40’s was a bottom dumping one. If you look at Fig 9-6 you can see the handle for releasing the bottom flap. The skip for incline haulage was loaded from front dumping skips on a Tippler. The original Tippler has been remounted in its original position at the bottom of the Scenic Railway.
Post fromPhillip Pells:
p117: In the second paragraph it is stated that ‘…the “slack” or small coal, that had not been profitable to take, and had been left by North’s miners as roof support’. SJ suggests that the small coal would not have been used as roof support as it would have been ineffective. In response we note that we took this statement from the articles by Bennett, which we have found to contain other errors. However, in this case Bennett may have been correct because, firstly, there is no doubt that the small coal was left in the colliery during the workings of the late 1800’s , because there was no viable sale value in small coal. Secondly, that it was left stacked up against the roof was also , no doubt, true- given that the seam thickness was less than 1m over most of the mine. Thirdly, while we admit uncertainty as to whether it was explicitly considered to form some form of roof support we could accept that it was , because in the torbanite mine at the Ruined Castle North’s miners used an advancing longwall system and explicitly used waste to provide roof support. So it would not have been strange to transfer this concept to the bord-and-pillar mining in the colliery.