Gresley's P2 Mikados - new book by Andrew Hardy

[Danby Wiske]

Brian
PEDANT ALERT!!!

This is written in a light hearted manner.
Before you put everything in you library, you do need to rectify a couple of spelling errors

not weather but whether

not roll but role

And i agree the Thompson/Gresley spat should be put to bed. Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one.Any biography now is based on previous books on the subject and sway one way or the other according to that persons views on the subject. However once they have added their take, the truth gets further diluted, plus there are recent authors who purport to be an 'expert' on things LNER and get the basic information incorrect, by didnt of just copying what was written before.
One of the reasons i dont watch the historical series shown on TV , where these experts try and second guess what Henry VIII might have said and interpret it as they would like to see it.

Andy Best of luck with your book

As a slight deviation, can you name the person who has designed and built the most steam locomotives

Ron

Re: PEDANT ALERT!!!

Something about people who live in glass houses springs to mind...

1. everything in your library - not you
2. and sways one way or the other - not sway
3. that person's views - with an apostrophe
4. by dint of - not didn't
5. don't watch - apostrophe again

Oh and by the way, it is customary in the English language to use a capital 'I' for the first person singular...

[Atlantic 3279]

Quite. You beat me to it......

[silverfox]

Touche mon ami (and before you jump on that i know that there should be an l'accent aigu on the final e of touche)

[52D]

What a kicked over Hornets nest this thread has turned out to be. Lets get back to the original subject of SAC Martins post about a rather neglected (in print) class of locomotives and keep the personality cults out of it. I myself am looking forward to reading this book.
Whilst i put my moderators hat on to say there has been threads on here to discuss the Thompson/Peppercorn debate and i am sure that these threads are the correct place to have that discussion. I also would like to add i do not know Mr Allatt so i have no particular axe to grind but find the attacks on him rather out of keeping with the normal civilised behaviour on this Forum. So in conclusion lets all take a deep breath and step back for a few seconds and think about the original post before adding comments.

[silverfox]

52D

It was not an attack on Allatt

It was a statement of fact on what he said. Other people can decide what type of man says that sort of thing. I know what I think of him. My first impression was not a good one, he can never change that.

I shall check on the book in the IA library before making a decision whether or not to part with some cash, like i do with any book i buy. Hopefully it will appear on my bookshelf,only time and examination will tell.

[drmditch]

I do not usually contribute to such heated and personal debates as the above; however as an 'older person' I continue to be surprised at the manner in which some people behave on-line.

May I make an appeal, please, for common courtesy and common sense.

I enjoy this forum because of the informed and helpful way in which many people discuss my major railway interests.
Most of these, especially the NER, LNER, and a large part of the British heavy engineering industry, are now firmly within the historical sphere.

I see no reason therefore why repetition of individual opinion or even prejudice can be helpful, except in-so-far as it comes from people with personal experience who can contribute to the historical record.

Distinction between primary and secondary sources is first-year undergraduate stuff, at least it was in my time. What ex-LNER apprentices thought of Edward Thompson is useful information. The personal opinion of anyone born much after 1955 without direct experience is unlikely to be so, except in far as they are able to assess and present the considerable range of primary and secondary sources available to us.

Yes, the assessment of the relative merits of Gresley,Thompson and Peppercorn makes a fascinating sphere of historical study, but it is precisely that!
It is not an area where absolute answers are likely to be found or personal prejudices (which we all have of course) are likely to do other than annoy.

As with all historical debate, we may get heated about such subjects. For heaven's sake let us remain polite!

I for one will certainly be purchasing a copy of Mr Hardy's book through the Trust.

*************

The above has been written on a slightly shaky laptop after a full Sunday lunch, never-the-less I will take criticism of my language, syntax, or spelling extremely personally.

I will demand satisfaction, and my chosen weapons will be battle-cruisers at dawn!

[Kestrel]

a full Sunday lunch

What is the difference between a 'Sunday lunch' and a 'full Sunday lunch'?

[silverfox]

I would assess the difference between

Sunday Lunch Eating only what has been put on your plate by the host, or the cook

Full sunday Lunch

going around the kitchen and putting on the plate any excess roast spuds., yorkshires, veg,a few more slices of meat, and licking out the gravy bowl
Then looking for seconds on the pudding!!


And i would more the birthdate back to 1948

Watchin the prog on Queen Victoria kids. all these bloody experts pontificating . I dont mind the tslking heads, but these express it as tohugh they were there and privy to everything, i know papers exist, but it ia all conjecture Dictionary Def Expert.... Ex a hasbeen...spurt, a drip under pressure (Blaster Bates 1980...)

[S.A.C. Martin]

Yes, the assessment of the relative merits of Gresley,Thompson and Peppercorn makes a fascinating sphere of historical study, but it is precisely that!
It is not an area where absolute answers are likely to be found!

So does that mean we are not allowed to try and find absolute answers, or even different ways of looking at the source evidence?

So much of that aimed at, for example, Thompson, is acrophyal so much of it can be challenged in the first instance because it's based on said prejudices you speak of.

[mick b]

After 70 + years how many sources physical or paper exist that haven't been used before ? answers on a postage stamp please!.

Simon if you have information to stop these continuing pointless arguments then please produce it be in book form or at least quote your sources on a Thompson only thread asap. People can then read what is new other than actually known before or said If ? , there is anything else not already published.

There cant be many people left who actually knew or worked with Thompson or Peppercorn, Gresley even less , they will be 90 years old at least. How good are people of such advanced age memories? .

As been said already so many times before 100% correct evidence other than paper recorded is going to be very doubtful as to correctness, even paper record aren't totally fallible . All records will still be subject to opinion rumour etc as well as to actual facts as to his period of tenure as CME.

I have no idea why the Thompson argument/discussion is even on this thread, the thread relates to a Gresley designed machine ,other than being albeit later virtually scrapped and turned into Pacifics by Thompson . I would imagine that part of the actual book is a small chapter at most.

[S.A.C. Martin]

After 70 + years how many sources physical or paper exist that haven't been used before ? answers on a postage stamp please!.

Simon if you have information to stop these continuing pointless arguments then please produce it be in book form or at least quote your sources on a Thompson only thread asap. People can then read what is new other than actually known before or said If ? , there is anything else not already published.

I feel a trifle slighted Mick: I quote religiously from the publications I've worked from and have had access to a lot of new material.

There cant be many people left who actually knew or worked with Thompson or Peppercorn, Gresley even less , they will be 90 years old at least. How good are people of such advanced age memories?

No there are not: and in the course of my work - like Andrew - I've taken interviews from some people who are getting on. Many of them are incredibly detailed in their responses and a number of the interviewees give a very different story to that told by the populist views.

As been said already so many times before 100% correct evidence other than paper recorded is going to be very doubtful as to correctness, even paper record aren't totally fallible . All records will still be subject to opinion rumour etc as well as to actual facts as to his period of tenure as CME.

Absolutely: but there's "correct" and then there's correct. It is correct to say the Thompson A2/2s were the first Pacifics scrapped: is it really correct to say it's because they were rubbish [sic]? I think not.

I have no idea why the Thompson argument/discussion is even on this thread, the thread relates to a Gresley designed machine ,other than being albeit later virtually scrapped and turned into Pacifics by Thompson . I would imagine that part of the actual book is a small chapter at most.

If you had bothered to read the thread Mick you'd know this came up because a poster decided on the basis of my support of the book (and my known views on Thompson) that he wouldn't be buying it.

I had no intention whatsoever of bringing the subject up and did not do so originally.

So as much as you'd like to blame me for the Thompson debate this time around, I didn't start it and requested an end to it twice previously.

[mick b]

Simon, it is so much easier to either just ignore the posts or as I said create a stand alone thread on Thompson, then people can say what they like within reason there as you can yourself with as much evidence that is available. You keep on numerous occasions referring to new material on Thompson, when is anything of this going to be seen ?.

I have read all of the posts on this thread , no idea why you think I hadn't done so. It Includes a post of mine saying why don't people calm down on page 1, that opinion still holds on page 3.

No offence was intended or implied , I was simply a request to keep the thread to the P2 which is what it should be about from the first post.

[drmditch]

Yes, the assessment of the relative merits of Gresley,Thompson and Peppercorn makes a fascinating sphere of historical study, but it is precisely that!
It is not an area where absolute answers are likely to be found!

So does that mean we are not allowed to try and find absolute answers, or even different ways of looking at the source evidence?

So much of that aimed at, for example, Thompson, is acrophyal so much of it can be challenged in the first instance because it's based on said prejudices you speak of.

Well, I didn't mean to open up a new area of controversy!

Firstly, although engineering has to find absolute answers, economics (and even 'dread word' politics) are frequently unable to, and engineering can only function in the context of economics and politics.

Secondly, of course we must continue to search for and re-evaluate primary and secondary sources. (I think I did say that in my original post.) If nothing else it is very interesting to do so and sometimes casts light on unexpected areas.

For me, some of the most revelatory information to come out of the Darlington P2 project so far is the study of the crank axle. (... here...) If the crank axle and pins were the same as for the A3s then the increased power transmission combined with the greater adhesion which reduced the ability to slip must indeed have risked overstressing the axle.

According the the Graham Nicolas study mentioned above this happened at least four times). I hope Mr Hardy will be able to tell us more. if Edward Thompson was aware of the problem then it might have affected the decision to not take the P2s south for the heavy wartime trains on the ECML south of Edinburgh. A broken crank axle coming out of KX in wartime would not have made the engines popular at all!


Thirdly, you are of course right in that prejudices do indeed become part of the material we need to study and understand. Edward Thompson's own views of the Gresley conjugated gear are a case in point.

What is not helpful is when distinctly prejudiced opinions are repeated at second or third hand, and these are even less helpful when combined with abusive language and lack of courtesy towards those holding different opinions.

Of course, some historical disputes as to 'what really happened' become really dangerous. My original post light-heartedly referred to D11 5504, and the fate of D9 6021 !

[richard]

Yes it is time to end the Thompson thread - or here at least. It is going around in circles and not getting anywhere fast (rather like a Brunel-designed steam engine ho-ho-ho)

History is full of ambiguity and interpretation. As well as multiple interpretations of the P2s and Thompson, the LNER world has McDonnell. He clearly had talent and on paper "just what the NER needed" but was very unpopular in some quarters. It is common in other fields - Queen Victoria's family has been mentioned. I've just been reading about Ada Lovelace - there's ambiguity everywhere in her life, and historians have a very wide range of opinions on her achievements (or if she even had any). That is just the way it is.

[S.A.C. Martin]

You keep on numerous occasions referring to new material on Thompson, when is anything of this going to be seen ?

When I am happy with the book and not before, I'm afraid, though to anyone who PMs me directly I have been happy to provide copies of the documents I am working from.

No offence was intended or implied , I was simply a request to keep the thread to the P2 which is what it should be about from the first post.

None taken Mick - but I must say, that's why I started the thread in the first place - to discuss the P2 book!