Bit of a shameless plug, but it's such a good book that I had to put it out there. Especially given the interest in the building of no.2007 over the past two years.
The P2 Steam Locomotive Company is delighted to exclusively announce the publication of an all new book on the P2 class locomotives in conjunction with Ian Allan Publishing.
The book, written by the Trust's researcher and archivist Andrew Hardy will feature new and unseen photographs, letters and other material never previously printed making this the must read book on the class. A contribution from the sale of each book will go towards No. 2007 Prince of Wales. This will be higher if bought direct from the Trust.
Pre-orders are available now through the Trust for publication in May 2016 with no money required until final publication. To pre-order or for more information please email andy.hardy@p2steam.com
I would like to assure readers that this book is worth purchasing. It is, in my opinion, the most balanced and fair account of these locomotives ever written: it includes never-seen before archive material, and the fact that its sale directly contributes to the building of no.2007 Prince of Wales is a further bonus.
Quite frankly, if you love the locomotives of Sir Nigel Gresley, you need this book in your collection.
Thanks,great Class,but i think i will pass.
I now try to steer clear of anything Allatt is involved in. I have looked through the OED to find a word that does not flatter him.. Failed completely
S.A.C. Martin wrote:Bit of a shameless plug, but it's such a good book that I had to put it out there. Especially given the interest in the building of no.2007 over the past two years....
Quite frankly, if you love the locomotives of Sir Nigel Gresley, you need this book in your collection.
How come you are plugging it when it's not being published until May? I make my own mind up about the books I need and this will not be one of them.
silverfox wrote:Thanks,great Class,but i think i will pass.
I now try to steer clear of anything Allatt is involved in. I have looked through the OED to find a word that does not flatter him.. Failed completely
You're a little wide of the mark there. Andrew Hardy is the Trust's archivist and he has done all the work himself. He's also done an exceptionally good job of putting it all together.
Now, I can understand your position given events unrelated to this book. All I am doing is alerting other LNER aficionados. Nothing more and nothing less. The author has done so much to try and produce something of quality that it is a shame to cut one's nose to spite one's face isn't it?
65447 wrote:
S.A.C. Martin wrote:Bit of a shameless plug, but it's such a good book that I had to put it out there. Especially given the interest in the building of no.2007 over the past two years....
Quite frankly, if you love the locomotives of Sir Nigel Gresley, you need this book in your collection.
How come you are plugging it when it's not being published until May? I make my own mind up about the books I need and this will not be one of them.
I'm plugging it because I've read it, and it's brilliant frankly. Sorry to not have convinced you but I must ask if your response was wholly necessary?
It is a shame in an age when we all as LNER fans should be uniting behind common causes that we find ourselves divided more than ever.
I haven't posted for a while but...blimey Simon, if you get that reaction when you kindly tip us off about a good new publication, I wouldn't bother posting in future!
Personally, I would like to thank you, and because I love the P2, it is highly likely I will buy a copy.
If the P2 Trust benefit and we are one rivet closer to seeing a P2 run, than I'm even happier still.
The A1 and P2 will be around far longer than any of us or any of the personalities involved in the A1 or P2 Trusts.
In my experience characters who get things done generally rub a few people up the wrong way whilst they do it, but thank God for them. Nothing would ever happen if most of us were left to it!
Let's focus on continuing the LNER legacy rather than the people.
Simon, if it isn't published for a few months, how have you seen it? Were you a proof-reader or something like that? (just wondering)
It makes sense that the P2 people produce a book - helps grow interest, raise a little bit of money, and they already have a highly targeted mailing list
richard wrote:Simon, if it isn't published for a few months, how have you seen it? Were you a proof-reader or something like that? (just wondering)
As a matter of fact, yes I proof read the book with a few other people. Andrew also had some lengthy discussions about Edward Thompson with me, and I was glad to share my research and knowledge to that end. We were not going to ultimately agree on everything but I believe Andrew's account is the most balanced one I have read on the rebuilds that has been published.
S.A.C. Martin wrote:All I am doing is alerting other LNER aficionados. Nothing more and nothing less. The author has done so much to try and produce something of quality that it is a shame to cut one's nose to spite one's face isn't it?
Well, even if others aren't grateful, I am - thanks.
S.A.C. Martin wrote:...Andrew also had some lengthy discussions about Edward Thompson with me, and I was glad to share my research and knowledge to that end...
You just lost the book another potential sale there. You have already bored for England on this subject from a position of invincible ignorance, and I won't put a penny toward anything which might further propagate your opinions.
S.A.C. Martin wrote:...Andrew also had some lengthy discussions about Edward Thompson with me, and I was glad to share my research and knowledge to that end...
You just lost the book another potential sale there. You have already bored for England on this subject from a position of invincible ignorance, and I won't put a penny toward anything which might further propagate your opinions.
I think you should re-read what I said:
As a matter of fact, yes I proof read the book with a few other people. Andrew also had some lengthy discussions about Edward Thompson with me, and I was glad to share my research and knowledge to that end. We were not going to ultimately agree on everything but I believe Andrew's account is the most balanced one I have read on the rebuilds that has been published.
I am afraid you are a little wide of the mark if you think I have influenced Andrew's own views on Thompson and the P2 rebuilds.
But how remarkable that you would cite "invincible ignorance" given the research that I have done.
I find it absolutely incredible the aggression shown by several of the posters here. I merely sought to make you aware of a very good book: one which goes into greater depth on the P2s and their rebuilding than anything which has been produced before.
I have been very impressed with Andrew Hardy's professionalism throughout, and his willingness to listen to alternate views, even if - as I said - he does not necessarily agree with those views.
But how remarkable to lose a book sale because he has spoken to me on Edward Thompson! I feel I should put that one down to experience and move on. Quite incredible that in this day and age there is such intolerance of alternate views.
Simon, I will defend to the death your right to hold the views you hold, since they are essentially harmless. But grant me the right, along with many others, to equally hold the view that you are sadly very wide of the mark. What you might consider a balanced account is therefore not one likely to appeal to me. Thompson was a first rate inadequate for the role of CME, and plenty of his contemporaries in engineering may be found holding that opinion. They were there, they were experienced engineers in the field, and to disagree with their appraisals is unwise.
Hatfield Shed wrote:Simon, I will defend to the death your right to hold the views you hold, since they are essentially harmless. But grant me the right, along with many others, to equally hold the view that you are sadly very wide of the mark. What you might consider a balanced account is therefore not one likely to appeal to me.
I accept that, however much of what I have written is coming from the point of view of the historiography of Thompson and not his engineering qualities.
Thompson was a first rate inadequate for the role of CME, and plenty of his contemporaries in engineering may be found holding that opinion. They were there, they were experienced engineers in the field, and to disagree with their appraisals is unwise.
I would be interested to read such appraisals as the interviews I have conducted with people who actually worked with Thompson's designs have been enlighteningly more positive accounts than the tiredly negative ones found in the usual sources. If you could point me in such a direction, I would be more than happy to be enlightened.
However my work focuses not entirely on the quality of Thompson's work, but his historiography and if that reported has been fair to him. I feel this distinction is one which should be noted; for example, the reported "facts" that Thompson selected Great Northern for rebuilding when evidence has been presented to me that he had no hand in that whatsoever.
The quality of Great Northern is covered by other more knowledgeable hands - and if Peter Townend describes it as "an excellent engine by all accounts" then who am I to argue with him?
On that note, and with it in mind that I would prefer to not turn this into yet another Thompson debate (for yes - I too weary of them!) perhaps we could focus on the fact that an excellent publication is in the offing that will help complete another new build adding to the ranks of our LNER locomotive designs in existence?
S.A.C. Martin wrote:...I would be interested to read such appraisals ...
On his poor interpersonal skills, absolutely key to the role of running the department as CME, Grafton's book contains many examples. The unjustified jealousy toward Peppercorn over the 'Bayonet' coach for Eisenhower a good specimen. There and elsewhere it is quite clear that despite the habitual politesse and respect for the postion of CME of those company officers who wrote of their experiences under ET, that he made life very difficult to the point of unpleasantness for many of the key staff and left behind a demoralised team on his retirement.
On the technical side, try 'Bill Harvey's 60 years in steam' author DW Harvey, pub David and Charles. That's regarding the L1, a fully Thompson design. The assemblage designs of existing proven parts largely worked well enough: proven components enabled this. That they consistently failed to improve on what had gone before where direct comparision can be made is undoubted. The people operating the equipment were not amateurs, and the earlier scrapping of Thompson pacifics than the designs they were supposed to supersede is all the argument required.
