If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Sir Nigel Gresley - The L.N.E.R.’s First C.M.E.

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by S.A.C. Martin, Dec 3, 2021.

  1. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    35,121
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    In riposte I will ask if you truly think that the B1 took forward Gresley's work on the V4. His Pacifics are recognisably not Gresley either. Understandably he has his own ideas and went with them. You've done your job of rehabilitating Thompson in your book. Please try not to carry it over into a book on Gresley.
     
  2. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    My view is based on fact.

    I don’t know what yours is based on, but again I repeat that not carrying on the Gresley V4 does not mean Thompson did not carry forward Gresley’s legacy in a meaningful way.

    Claiming that Thompson’s Pacifics are “recognisably not Gresley” is just wrong.

    With respect, we’re not going to agree, but at least my work and my views are based on something more than secondary sources and opinion.
     
  3. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,103
    Likes Received:
    57,432
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Just as a bit of light relief, and a wry comment on LNER influence beyond 1948:

    From another thread, a collection of BR Standard locomotive diagrams: https://www.bishopstokehistory.uk/british-railway-standard-locomotive-diagrams/

    Take a look at the class names given on the drawings:

    350hp diesel shunter -- JD
    2MTT 2-6-2T (84000) -- 2VT
    3MTT 2-6-2T (82000) -- 3VT
    2MT 2-6-0 (78000) -- 2K
    3MT 2-6-0 (77000) -- 3K
    4MT 2-6-0 (76000) -- 4K
    4MTT 2-6-4 (80000) -- 4LT
    4MT 4-6-0 (75000) -- 4B
    5MT 4-6-0 (73000) -- 5B
    6MT 4-6-2 (72000) -- 6A
    7MT 4-6-2 (70000) -- 7A
    8MT 4-6-2 (71000) -- 8A
    9F 2-10-0 (92000) -- 9R

    So you basically get a power class and then a letter designator that matches the LNER scheme, i.e. J for an 0-6-0; V for a 2-6-2; B for a 4-6-0; K for a 2-6-0; A for a 4-6-2; L for a 2-6-4.

    Anyway, as you were ...

    Tom
     
    S.A.C. Martin likes this.
  4. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    35,121
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    With all due respect your view is based on opinion. How you can say it’s fact that the B1 carried forward Gresley’s work on the V4 is beyond me. Further debate is pointless. Goodbye.
     
  5. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    I was looking at just such a collection a few days ago in the Head of Steam museum at Darlington North Road. https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/q7-63460-63474-0-8-0-ner-raven-3-cylinder/
    To make it even more interesting, the middle valve is driven by a lever which reverses the direction of movement of the rod from the expansion link. It's fairly easy to see because there's a fair amount of empty space under the boiler.
     
  6. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don't know how we are miscommunicating here, but for clarity: my view, which is based in fact, is that Thompson did carry forward Gresley's legacy by way of utilising pretty much every single good bit of design and standard components he could find when trying to produce designs with his team for the LNER. This is borne out by the Gresley parts and designs he utilised in his own designs.

    Not taking forward the Gresley V4 does not mean Thompson didn't take forward Gresley's work. He did, just in a different direction, and Peppercorn followed on from that.

    And in any event, I did not at any point in this thread say Thompson took forward the V4 design specifically.

    The Thompson B1 utilises Gresley era designed standard components throughout. It builds on design work done by Gresley and his team. That is entirely factual, and probably the greatest compliment that could be paid to the best of Gresley's work.

    Trite and remarkably rude, yet again derailing another thread. Just because you don't like what is presented in front of you, doesn't mean it isn't factual.
     
  7. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    Where has Simon or anyone else suggested that the B1 carried forward Gresley’s work on the V4? Simon has pointed out how much of the B1 design used Gresley components and dimensions, but obviously the combination was very different from a V4, apart from their both being go-anywhere lightish weight mixed-traffic locos.
     
  8. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I have heard it said to me before that I "can't attribute the B1 to Thompson" because all of its parts were standard Gresley components.

    At some point you just have to give up on trying to get the point across.

    Some generations have been raised on a lot of propaganda and a lot of lies where Gresley/Thompson were concerned and some people would prefer to believe those and argue the toss than to look at what is plainly in front of them and revise their views.

    In Tim Hillier-Graves' books on Gresley and Thompson, there are some really good points he made about the nature of their relationship and how Thompson's work has been vilified out of all recognition for what was actually happening and going on. Tim actually went further than I did, incidentally, in his Gresley book and he believes - rightly - that the assistants including Thompson and Bert Spencer do not get enough credit for the work they did under Gresley.

    In my book, I go a weeny bit further and I think there's also a lack of credit given to Gresley that becomes abundantly clear when you look at how the LNER continued after he passed. He supported his assistants well and developed them into fine designers, engineers and managers in their own right. Every success they had (Thompson, Spencer, Peppercorn, Harrison, Bulleid) is as much down to their own hard work and their own ideas as it is also about Gresley recognising their talents and supporting their development in his career.

    One could make a very cogent argument that Gresley was training up Thompson and Peppercorn for the top roles in the early war years. Probably borne out by the fact they became CME in quick succession after him.
     
    ragl likes this.
  9. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I didn't: I have no idea where that came from but I wouldn't bother arguing with him to be frank. I think I had better utilise the ignore button for only third time on this forum.

    It is truly, truly wearying being a writer on the LNER's history. Properly wearying.

    If you do things correctly, i.e. in an academic way, backed up with evidence, citations, data, you get told that your work is "just an opinion" - which it isn't - and you are then beholden to listen to people say the same old warmed over absolute nonsense time and time again, and then tell you with no hint of irony that you don't know what you're talking about.
     
  10. RLinkinS

    RLinkinS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2008
    Messages:
    912
    Likes Received:
    928
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Probably more difficult to oil up than a GWR 4 cylinder loco.

    Sent from my SM-A105FN using Tapatalk
     
  11. RLinkinS

    RLinkinS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2008
    Messages:
    912
    Likes Received:
    928
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Sorry Simon I do not know and I do not have sufficient information to check. Perhaps someone else can advise.

    Sent from my SM-A105FN using Tapatalk
     
  12. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    From experience of 63460 they were easier to oil up than a GWR inside cylinder tank such as a 56XX as you could get to most from on top, something the tanks stop you doing on the 56XX.
     
    D6332found and RLinkinS like this.
  13. D6332found

    D6332found Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    179
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dinting
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I think iirc it was preserved because of the excellent design of the 3 cylinder which was in no way inferior to to SNGs.
    I think a whole.part of SNG designs seem to come from great North Eastern locos.
    But you're writing long after the occurance and it's alright citing many board minutes but this can be inferior to talking to many eye witnesses like many could have done in the past. So the product won't have that kind of interest. Its just a dull book of board meetings or recycled stuff. Everyone always says why do I call the A4 a Bugatti nose, where's the evidence for that. Merely anecdotal. From someone who was int that drawing office.
     
  14. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    This is a frustratingly inaccurate point of view. That isn't true. Board minutes in the UK have to be reflective of the truth, and the board isn't interested in the enthusiasts' secondary evidence of what their locomotives are doing.

    Primary evidence is the top layer of historical examination. That's looking at records, reports, statistics and other evidence that is contemporary with the era you are researching.

    It has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that to focus solely on secondary evidence (i.e. eyewitness - but written long after the event) has a huge amount of pitfalls, not least accuracy. Individuals sometimes - as is human nature - sex up or confabulate the truth.

    In considering all of the evidence, you have to look at what corroborates what. Case in point, the Thompson A2/2s.
    • Board minutes are corroborated by reports, which are verified by collected statistics, that these locomotives performed well when rebuilt from P2s and did the same duties as a P2
    • Secondary evidence - all individual recollections, and only a few loud voice - state they couldn't do the work, and were no more reliable
    So what do you believe? Three sets of primary evidence that tells you one story, or the secondary evidence not backed up by anything contemporary to the time it is reporting on?

    This is really basic academic stuff we are talking about here. It is telling that some railway enthusiasts would prefer to settle for the easy route, secondary evidence.

    No, it's not good enough I am afraid. I want railway history and railway historians to be far better than that.

    Have you actually read the Thompson book I produced? That's not what I wrote at all. That's also definitely not what I am producing here for the Gresley book.

    The Bugatti railcar was painted the same powder/french/garter blue as the A4 Pacific and was a similar shape (hence Bugatti). The similarity is striking enough on its own. This is the reference and this has been misinterpreted by enthusiasts countless times. If you do the research well you come up with a far more interesting answer than "someone who was in the drawing office".
     
    CoalFiredGeek and Copper-capped like this.
  15. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    We are still eagerly awaiting the source of your information, by the way. :rolleyes:
     
  16. D6332found

    D6332found Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    179
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dinting
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    All 4 wartime CME suffered a similar fate of producing little new, and having the difficult job of just keeping what they had going. Indeed, with no doubtlimited staff, and materials, they all did the job necessary. Bulleids awkward pacific was approved before the war, the few rolled out perhaps influenced the policy. And no disapproval from now gone relatives on Thompsons rebuilding of the P2s ,"they were awful!"
     
  17. Enterprise

    Enterprise Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,275
    Likes Received:
    3,077
    I am no railway historian but your point seems well made to me. But is it not the case that the the trains for which the P2s were designed did not continue and that the P2s worked below their potential capacity?
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2022
    35B likes this.
  18. huochemi

    huochemi Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,751
    Likes Received:
    1,393
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I don't think you can be as entirely formulistic as you seem to suggest in determining what is good evidence and what is not so good. Ultimately (and I speak as one who has written a number of books) it tends to be subjective, based on one's own feel for what is likely to be reliable (and yes, prejudice can come into this inadvertantly or otherwise), but one can try to avoid being too dogmatic where there is conflicting information and leave it to the reader to form their own view. Take for instance Bert Spencer's paper to the ILocoE in March 1947 on the Development of LNER Locomotive Design 1923-1941, which you may be familar with. This only covers Gresley's term in office, as Pep was still around and it may have been difficult to cover his and Thompson's designs in such a paper at that time. Now this paper was written some time after the events, and one can see for example from Langridge's books that his memories were sometimes not consistent. I however would take Spencer's paper as one of the more reliable sources, although some comments are more subjective and one would have to be sensitive to possible bias (and perhaps simply state that Spencer thought..., leaving it up to the reader).

    Coming back to the thread, the Bugatti influence is mentioned in this paper not by Spencer (perhaps he did not see it as particularly interesting) but by Bulleid in the following discussion.
    ’"I’here was one small point with regard to streamlining which might be of interest. Not only were the models tested in the wind tunnel, but Sir Nigel, who knew Bugatti, followed his work in France with close interest, made it his business to travel on the Bugatti rail-cars between Deauville and Paris, and was much impressed by the efficiency with which the wedge form of the front of the engine passed through the atmosphere with the minimum of
    disturbance It was really that which led to the type of front end adopted on the Pacifics."
    Again, that has a ring of truth albeit stated under somewhat informal circumstances.

    A couple of other interesting points in the paper: Spencer refers to a potential six cylinder geared 4-4-0, which was considered during the development of the D49 which looked (there is a drawing), a bit reminiscent of a Heisler arrangement, but with cylinders in a V formation each side of the smokebox.
    One speaker (a Mr A F Cook) referrred to two designs which did not materialise and he (Cook) managed to get outline drawings included in the paper - a 2-8-2T which looked like a large V1 and a 4-6-0 which looked (from the side) like a B17 with a taper boiler. Spencer replied that he had been unable to find anything in the Doncaster records about these designs, so quite where Cook got his info from is a bit of a mystery and perhaps something one would hesitate about before attributing them to Gresley.
     
  19. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes but...

    In my experience board minutes will record the decision that was made, but omit the reasons for that decision and not even list what alternatives were discussed.

    On the other hand precious few eyewitnesses were privy to these discussions either. Holcroft for one, if I recall correctly, reports 'office rumour' (but as such) where he wasn't involved in the actual decision making. In my IT career as a senior technical consultant I was rarely aware of why the executives made the decisions they did, especially when they were unwise enough to go against my recommendations!

    As good an example as any is Churchward's Great Bear, the GWR Pacific. There are any number of contrary tales/explanations of why it was built and whether Churchward liked it, but AFAICS barely a shred of evidence for any of them.
     
    MellishR and 35B like this.
  20. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,591
    Likes Received:
    9,325
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I sympathise Jim, but the L.N.E.R. board minutes remain very detailed and they very much discuss the issues and who gives what opinion. I would suggest your experience is probably in line with most boards, but the L.N.E.R. seemed to me from my reading to be interested in the detail and liked to discuss things through.

    I accept your point that my generalisation isn't indicative of every situation, of course.
     

Share This Page