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.

Edward Thompson: Wartime C.M.E. Discussion

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by S.A.C. Martin, May 2, 2012.

  1. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,067
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Fair point. By re-engaging with this thread I am in danger of repeating things said many times already so I will be brief.

    This is my 'take'. Gresley was a great designer and by all accounts a decent person. He was greatly missed when he died. Thompson's background had a strong maintenance focus. Labour shortages during WW2 meant that it was important to minimise additional work and look for ways to ease the upkeep of a stretched resource. He was also a difficult person to get on with but we did get the B1. Beyond this we are into the debate. To save repetition I won't go there again but this thread title seems accurate and fair to me.
     
    jnc and ross like this.
  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
    But where have we ever seen that written outside of Graftons book, Dick Hardy’s memoirs, and this thread?
     
    jnc and ross like this.
  3. 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
    And if I said that I believed they did, and that there is evidence to suggest this, would you look at it and reconsider your point of view?

    He did not initially have the mandate to make any changes whatsoever.

    This is the infuriating thing.

    You cannot criticise Thompson for wanting a second opinion and then finding it supports his view, say he would have done so anyway because - and this is factual - Thompson only received the authority to make any changes to the existing stock off the back of the report.

    It is in the LNER emergency committee minutes. The report wasn’t just a throwaway written document: it was over six months of investigation with supporting evidence, from two eminent railway engineers of the day.

    This is why revisiting the primary evidence we have available is so vital. This is why it matters.

    It changes the nature of the perception of the decision making.

    That changes Thompson the CME from a villainous, green eyed monster that he is depicted as, into something far more likely - an engineer with an opinion and a situation that required a response.
     
    49010, ross and jnc like this.
  4. jma1009

    jma1009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    1,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    ynysddu south wales
    Hi Simon,

    You need to get your research and book published. I will buy a copy.

    Cheers,

    Julian
     
  5. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,186
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    What did Hardy think of Thompson?
     
  6. jma1009

    jma1009 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    1,637
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    ynysddu south wales
    Hardy was a sycophant of Thompson. All part of the public school old boys network, and the favouritism Thompson showed as a result to Hardy.

    Simon will no doubt disagree, but things were very different back then, and the old school tie meant a lot then.

    Cheers,

    Julian
     
  7. 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 see that character assassination is alive and well in the railway world, Jules.

    Disagree? Of course I do. You are describing a gentleman railwayman in appalling terms. “Sycophant”. Simply because he did not agree with the descriptions Thompson has received over the years.

    Frankly Jules I think you’re out of line.

    Steam in the Blood - which was the volume in which Hardy’s full views on Thompson are recorded - is worth reading.

    I found Mr Hardy to be a highly intelligent, passionate and much loved man. We are the poorer for his passing last year.

    I regret that I did not converse nearly as much as I could have done with him over email. So many questions. So little time.
     
    jnc and Bluenosejohn like this.
  8. Hermod

    Hermod Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Klitmoeller,Denmark
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Thomsons real problem was that LNER management had not served shareholders very well by tolerating Gresley egotripping for so long.
    Thompson walked on very thin ice.
     
  9. 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
    Rubbish.
     
  10. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,067
    Likes Received:
    20,775
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Evidence?
    Evidence?

    Don't these two assertions, above, illustrate why this thread has probably reached its end point?
     
  11. 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
    No, I don't think so Al. Both of those views should, as you have done, be challenged and asked for the evidence.

    And that is at the crux of the matter where Thompson is concerned. "he looked to rid the LNER of Gresley". "Evidence?"

    That second question is almost never asked, and certainly evidence is rarely given. If you come up with the stats and tell people that Thompson couldn't possibly have looked to "rid the LNER of Gresley" much less that he carried on building Gresley designs (V2 and O2, and would have had more J50s too were it not for the diesel shunters and retirement) you get a lot of astonished looks and demands for further information.

    That's a good thing! If people are challenged and evidence is presented, views will change.

    Where Thompson is concerned, views must change. Otherwise we do him, and Gresley, a disservice. For the latter, ignoring the fact he was human, and in the former, by not thinking him more human.
     
  12. Victor

    Victor Nat Pres stalwart Friend

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    13,773
    Likes Received:
    7,941
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    DEWSBURY West Yorkshire
    Gresley's 'egotripping' o_O How do you come to that opinion ??
     
  13. 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
    You want evidence? Well here goes.
    If anyone cares to look at the history of the LNER they will see that it was the poorest of the Big Four from the outset and was particularly badly hit by the Depression. Had Gresley truly been on an "ego trip" we would have seen all manner of new designs but as it was he built tried and tested designs from pre grouping companies - e.g. more GCR Directors - alongside rebuilding/modifying existing classes as the LNER did not have the funds for wholesale renewal with new builds. Doesn't sound much like an ego trip to me.
     
    Fred Kerr, oldmrheath and RalphW like this.
  14. Johnb

    Johnb Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    14,318
    Likes Received:
    16,396
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired, best job I've ever had
    Location:
    Buckinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Like any other officer of the Railway Gresley answered to the board of directors and would not have been permitted to throw money about without their sanction. The LNER was a fairly impoverished railway but to counter competion from the LMS for the Anglo Scottish traffic and the business traffic to the West Riding the board authorised Gresley to build the streamliners. This was at the expense of lesser services and travellers on LNER local trains or lesser expresses in places like East Anglia had a pretty miserable time. Your notion that Gresley was allowed to go on an ego trip is nonsense.
     
  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
    Gents - Hermod may have a different view of Gresley to us and we should perhaps hear his thinking before condemning him out of hand. I disagree with his POV too but would be interested to hear why he thinks that way.

    If we look at Gresley and Thompson in isolation we see an emphasis on high end performance and a flair for publicity versus a desire to reduce maintenance costs and time and a desire to simplify.

    So I can understand to some extent that one or the other could be interpreted differently to the conventional thinking.
     
  16. Hermod

    Hermod Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    283
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Klitmoeller,Denmark
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Thank You for considering a revised evaluation of LNER board and Gresley,but it shall maybe have its own thread?
     
  17. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,494
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Maybe, but it is also relevant to the topic here.
     
  18. 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
    Hermod, post it here. It's relevant to the discussion as there were changes from 1939 -41 with how Gresley had to do things - and further changes with Thompson from 1941.

    On a separate note, I was pointed in the direction of the RHRP website, and low and behold we have a more full list of what remains from Thompson's era:

    LNER 13803 Thompson Tourist Open built 1946[​IMG]
    LNER 80417 Brake Composite built 1952[​IMG]
    LNER 59404 Class 506 Glossop/Hadfield EMU (part body only) built 1954[​IMG]
    LNER 70630 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (u'frame only) built 1946[​IMG]
    LNER 1531 GM's Saloon, then Obs for West Highland built 1945[​IMG]
    LNER 70589 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1945
    LNER 6866 Gresley Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1941[​IMG]
    LNER 14 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1948
    LNER 70592 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1945[​IMG]
    LNER 145 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1950
    LNER 70719 6-w Thompson Non-gangwayed Pass. Brake (body only) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1370 GUV (General Utility Van) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1767 Third Sleeper (scrapped) built 1951[​IMG]
    LNER 70687 6-w Thompson Non-gang. Pass.Brake (underframe only) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 70636 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake built 1946
    LNER 70758 Gresley Gangwayed Passenger Brake (Pigeon Van) built 1943
    LNER 104 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake built 1948
    LNER 70632 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake built 1946
    LNER 70654 6-w Thompson Non-gangwayed Passenger Brake built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 4050 Gresley Gangwayed Passenger Brake (Pigeon Van) built 1941[​IMG]
    LNER 70652 6-w Thompson Non-gang. Pass. Brake (body: scrapped) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 70668 6-w Thompson Non-gang. Pass. Brake (body: scrapped) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1334 Four-wheel CCT (Covered Carriage Truck) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 100 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1948
    LNER 1769 Third Sleeper (scrapped) built 1951[​IMG]
    LNER 1770 Third Sleeper (scrapped) built 1951[​IMG]
    LNER 1706 BR build of Thompson lounge buffet car built 1948[​IMG]
    LNER 70692 6-w Thompson Non-gang. Pass.Brake (underframe only) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1349 Covered Carriage Truck (body only: scrapped) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 59504 Glossop/Hadfield EMU (scrapped) built 1954[​IMG]
    LNER 59604 Glossop/Hadfield EMU (scrapped) built 1954[​IMG]
    LNER 706xx 6-w Thompson Non-gang. Pass.Brake (underframe only) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1866 Thompson Corridor Brake Third built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 70621 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake built 1945[​IMG]
    LNER 110 Thompson Gangwayed Full Brake built 1948[​IMG]
    LNER 18477 Thompson Corridor Composite built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 75169 Four-wheel Fish Van built 1948[​IMG]
    LNER 1322 Four-wheel CCT (Covered Carriage Truck) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1308 Four-wheel CCT (Covered Carriage Truck) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 1623 Thompson Corridor Third built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 88339 Thompson Lavatory Composite built 1947[​IMG]
    LNER 1259 First Sleeper (scrapped) built 1950
    LNER 65417 Liverpool Street-Shenfield EMU built 1949[​IMG]
    LNER 65617 Liverpool Street-Shenfield EMU built 1949[​IMG]
    LNER 65217 Liverpool Street-Shenfield EMU built 1949[​IMG]
    LNER 2459 Four-wheel Horse Box, later 'Cashier's Coach' built 1954[​IMG]
    LNER Four-wheel Fish Van (underframe only) built 1949[​IMG]
    LNER 70759 Gresley BGP (body only) converted to Third Brake built 1943[​IMG]
    LNER 1345 Four-wheel CCT (Covered Carriage Truck) built 1950[​IMG]
    LNER 70754 Gresley Gangwayed Passenger Brake (Pigeon Van) built 1943[​IMG]
    LNER 70741 Gresley Gangwayed Full Brake (scrapped) built 1943[​IMG]
    LNER Saloon Brake (convtd from LNER Ballast Brake) built 1945[​IMG]
    LNER Saloon Brake (convtd from LNER Ballast Brake) built 1945[​IMG]
    LNER 1150 Corridor Brake Composite (body only: scrapped) built 1947[​IMG]
    LNER 1260 First Sleeper (part underframe only) built 1950[​IMG]

    Some of these are not necessarily as designed under Thompson - these are copied from my search parameters (1941-1946) that I chucked in. Fascinating stuff though!
     
  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
    I suspect the importance of board/CME relationships is probably underestimated. The trouble is how to know what the board was thinking. If GWR minutes are any guide there just isn't enough to tell. Changes in personnel on the board and various committees is probably important too.
     
    jnc and S.A.C. Martin 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
    Having read pretty much the whole of the LNER's board minutes last summer over a four week period, I can say categorically that the LNER's attention to detail was astonishing, if incredibly specific and concise.
     

Share This Page