P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

It wasn't named after an aircraft carrier at all.

I recall the reasons given at the time the name was announced, was that being named after Prince Charles would open up opportunities for sponsorship and donations for the project with the association and that was why the name was chosen.

I don't get the feeling at all though since that this has been the case. What extra has the Prince of Wales name given the project in practice ?

They should have given it a Scottish name as per the original P2s considering the design was done specifically for Edinburgh to Aberdeen.

The Tornado name was chosen because the project was launched during the first gulf war and I do like that name, but the Prince of Wales name gets a thumbs down from me. It has no relevance at all to the history of the P2 type.

 

Well there’s this for starters…

 

Swish places like Australia?

 

By which logic, RH&D Nos.12 & 14 ought to be Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy .....

 

Gets my endorsement..

 

"Queen Nicola"?....how not to build a ship....

 

How much did the 2 Aircraft Carriers cost in the end? Isnt one back in dock with near fatal issues again?

Queen Nicola, is almost worse than pretending that the Earl of Buchan was the only powerful man with questionable morals in the 1300's.



On this naming discussion, I am inclined to agree that PoW is a questionable choice of name, particularly given how the people of Wales appear to be taking serious issue with the new incumbent to the title, and the investiture issue.

Relevance or not to individuals, the general public think of Charlie when they hear the name, and in time will think of William.

Is it wise, from a PR perspective, for the loco to be tied to an institution that is coming under increasing scrutiny?

To make the point, imagine calling the P2, Duke of York...

One of, or a derivation of, the original Scottish names may be a smart move, but there are a litany of other ways to go. Why not exploit the Darlington theme?
Why not mix the two?

Thane of Darlington?
Wolf of Durham?

Entirely fictional, just like a P2 that's 40% A1...

 

Your claim is based on what evidence?

 

Can't help but think there is an element of mischief here. The locomotive has been named, that's that. I don't see anyone clamouring to rename Duke of Gloucester or Princess Elizabeth, etc etc...based on that highly flimsy supposition.

King Charles III is hardly the most evil man of the 20th and 21st centuries, and his contributions to the UK far outstrip the vast majority of mortal men, both from a local point of view (employment across charities, businesses and estates) and his many contributions to the question of the environment.

Prince William is also a good man, and following in the steps of his late mother in so many different ways.

If you want to hold the royal family to account, do it: if you want to make Britain a republic, go and do it: but pestering the P2 Trust to change the name of their locomotive after it's well established for some years on the basis of a very few loud, disgruntled members for Wales putting it out there, with nothing solid on which to do anything about it, reeks of having nothing to better to do.

Why is there never a clamour for getting rid of the incumbents of office that are actually doing the most damage to the country, and more aimed at the royal family who don't have such influence anymore...!

 

It's a broken propeller, which is not exactly sinkable. Latest news available here: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/time-and-cost-of-aircraft-carrier-repair-not-yet-known/

Research, everyone, and evidence accordingly if you're going to make bold statements.

 

Which German battleship had a damaged rudder and was promptly sunk by the British fleet?
A warship has got to be 100% fit.

 

Yes, and? It's being fixed. No ship is ever unbreakable. Some ships have teething problems, the US North Carolinas had terrible vibration problems.

Lots of ships have been sunk after rudder problems. Usually percussively-induced. In most of the German ships I can think of (3), they were outnumbered and penned in. At some point they'd have been sunk by something breaking

 

An ex-warship driver writes....

A propeller is not a rudder - PoW could have done its entire tasking on one propeller in an emergency. We train all the time to be 100% fit to fight - which includes how to fight your ship when your ship is less than 100%. But, at the start of its deployment, within sight of Portsmouth, and with its sister available for tasking, why wouldn't you turn round? It would have handled like an absolute dog but it could have been handled.

Don't confuse 100% fit with 100% systems availability - it almost never happens.

 

On the first point, not sure anyone has called for that. Why would they? I believe the discussion has revolved around initial choices of names, not renaming. In the specific case of 2007, my own post stated the group's already existing 'Scottish Alternate' was more appropriate to a P2. I stand by that 100% on the very readily defensible grounds that it is!

Locos have been renamed (Livingston Thompson, Hurricane*), lost names (e.g. Dukedogs), been allocated names some time after construction (e.g. the earliest King Arthurs), so let's please not get hung up on pretending some sacrosanct link between a loco and a (from an operational perspective) totally extraneous lump of purely decorative metal.

On the 2nd point, had Emperor Gaius, or "a certain German Chancellor elected in the 1930s" died rather earlier during their respective careers, neither would now be recalled with near universal opprobrium. In the case of HMK, he's been in post less than 3 months ..... give the man a chance.

Not having met either HM or HRH, I'm in no position to comment on the personality of either, merely pointing out that the track record of our wonderful media in presenting some selected (and selective) portraiture is long and some way short of uniformally honourable ... or factually accurate.

*GWR No.5072 or RH&D No.8 .... take your pick.

 

There are many for whom names matter. Some of them for whom they matter will be supporters of the chosen name, others will oppose that name because it irritates their pre-existing nationalist and/or republican sensibilities. They're entitled to their views, and they're even entitled to agitate and mither in the attempt to make those names socially unacceptable. I very much doubt, however, that they will achieve any change - not least as some key personalities around the A1 Trust are not known for their sympathy to either republicanism or Scottish or Welsh nationalism.

 

I think you are missing the point. Opinions on the royal family are irrelevant. The point is that as every enthusiast knows, locomotives were typically named in a theme. If a new GWR King class was being constructed, King Charles 3 would be an appropriate name. A new castle, give it a castle name etc.

So it would have been logical to have followed that for the P2. What name might the LNER themselves have chosen if they had build another ? The LNER didn't even have a network in Wales.

 

Don't forget the Wrexham Mold & Connah's Quay line.

 

According to my late 50s observer's book two ex LNER locomotives , a large Director and an A3, were named Prince of Wales in the late 50s. Hard to argue the name is inappropriate for a LNER design.

 

I think you're missing a point though - 2007 is not being built by the LNER, so the P2 Trust can choose whatever name it likes. After all, Tornado hardly fits with the names of the LNER A1s and I don't think there are too many people complaining about that.

 

I'm sure someone (rather uncharitably) used to call the A1 "Borenado"...