Edward Thompson: Wartime C.M.E. Discussion

I can't comment on the engineering arguments on this thread. However, I went to see Tom Stoppards Arcadia last night. I suggest those who have posted on this thread at great length go and see it. They might just be a little less dogmatic in future in their posts.

 

I can tell you've not read the vast majority of the thread Paul nor have the knowledge to actually back up your generalisation.

It's always interesting how the most critical are always the ones to have done the least research and have their minds most firmly closed.

 

I have read a fair amount of the posts, a very high proportion of which, on both sides, are vituperative rather than enlightening. Tub thumpingly so in fact. All it has done is to convince me that no definitive answers will be found, certainly not by any of those involved here because their minds are indeed closed.

PH

 

On which we surprisingly agree: I don't think on some points you will find definitive answers, either.

However that's not the point of the exercise: from the start it has always been about contextualising the evidence and questioning the established thinking.

If it shows that Thompson has been treated fairly previously: then so be it. If not, then perhaps both sides of the debate can concede ground and accept a revision in the established "facts".

 

I rather think you should stop wasting time on this repetitive thread and put the energy into finishing the research and writing the book. Once published we could read it and comment more cogently.

 

The thread has been useful for finding out new sources and seeing different points of views. I'm always working on the manuscript at varying times in my spare time so I don't consider this thread "wasting time". I think we'll agree to disagree there. Besides which there's been many interesting slight diversions along the way.

 

As one who contributed a source, I think it is interesting that Simon was unaware of the book I recommended or the "gem" that confirmed Haymarket depot had instigated it's own researches on the conjugated valve gear; this had discovered that most problems arose after 40,000 miles hence the depot unilaterally decided to change its 30,000 examination process and reduced the problems by a quantifiable amount. Now to any researcher the immediate questions are (1) was the decision and the consequences passed onto either Doncaster; Gresley; other Gresley-engined depots (2) what action, if any was taken by anyone so informed (3) whose fault was it if Haymarket's experiences / expertise were not promulgated more widely.

I now presume that Simon will be looking further at this point because it is the nub of the Gresley / Thompson dilemma regarding the conjugated valve gear; did Gresley maintain its use because depots such as Haymarket could both maintain and work with it or did Thompson reject it because other depots couldn't / wouldn't. To my mind - as a reader - these are the types of questions to which the answers would be interesting as they give an indication of the designer's mindsets and the quality of the principles that are the basis of his design logic whilst highlighting the differences between locomotives as designed and locomotives as operated.

 

i have thoroughly enjoyed simon's thread, and the banter has been very good natured and well informed. i agree with simon and fred that lots of new lines of enquiry have resulted which can only be productive.

it is quite interesting how much 'untapped' info of primary source stuff is out there. i have found out tons of stuff researching various locos none of which is mentioned in the standard texts on these locos (unfortunately in the case of this thread non-LNER) - or if mentioned failed to grasp the engineering significance of certain details.

my own hope is that someone will one day edit and publish the manuscript of a book written by Harold Holcroft held by the NRM.

a friend of mine has been doing some research into Willie Pearce, the valve gear supremo of the GWR in Churchward and Collett times, and i can i think safely say that my friend has unearthed more valuable info in the last few years than has ever been published previously.

i am sure that simon will do the same with Edward Thompson.

cheers,
julian

 

But that may be a negative course of action as some of the new sources have resulted from discussions on this thread and if they are to be no longer posted then what spur is there to further data.

Returning to my Haymarket example : the thread noted that Haymarket seemed to fare better than many other depots in dealing with the Gresley conjugated valve gear and asked why ? As a native of Edinburgh whose uncle was the Goods Yard Inspector there for many years I collect info on Haymarket - hence my possession of a book by Harry Knox on Haymarket locomotives. I thought to check the book to see if any comments were made on that point and - to my surprise - there was evidence that not only confirmed Haymarket's superior performances but gave the reasons why and how. Had the discussion NOT taken place on this thread I would have been unaware of the interest in Haymarket - would NOT have checked the book concerned - and NOT found a piece of the jigsaw which Simon is trying to complete.

Whilst I sympathise with Big Al who may be getting bored with the subject, it interests enough of us to continue - provided posters don't duplicate material that has already been referred to. I for one am interested and - noting that I have over 1000 books in my library - it is only when a comment is posted on this thread that I am made aware that the subject appears in one of my books and I can offer further info to add to the discussion. What use Simon - or others - can make of it is up to their needs.

Hence I see no reason why this thread shouldn't continue - as long as it is respectful and informative in its discussions.

 

The biggest problem with writing on Edward Thompson isn't so much the dearth of information - there is plenty! It is fact that to get the whole story you have to read many, many, many different volumes. It's like a giant jigsaw at the best of times. There's no doubt in my mind that Thompson's story needs to be all in one volume with appropriate referencing and fair and balanced critique. I'm not going to shy away from quoting the time keepers points - at all - whilst also providing as much data as I can from my own research.

I'd be happier if the thread continued but if it helps others a little that I post somewhat less, that is fair and reasonable in my view.

 

I don't see why people have a problem with this thread - one is not compelled to read it. If you think it has run its course don't open it, Simples!

 

You won't get very far by rehashing what previous authors have written. For your book to be authoritative it needs to be based as far as possible on primary sources. Despite the wisdom and knowledge of some NP members commenting in this thread, I don't believe any were working for the LNER in the 30s and 40s. That is why I think you should be ensconced in the reading rooms of the NRM and the Institution of Mechanical Engineers etc.. Find the maintenance records of the locomotive classes, read the reports from the shedmasters etc., check the information that earlier authors quoted.

To assuage any misunderstanding, I don't mind a jot if the thread carries on going around in circles, revealing a novel snippet once a revolution; I think it is quite interesting.

 

A very fair comment and I agree with your views entirely.

 

Yes, the number of vituperative posts on this thread has been distressingly high. But they have all come from only a few of the contributors. I have been greatly impressed by the consistently polite and reasoned posts from some of the other contributors, even when they have been responding to vituperative ones. You all know who you are.

 

I had meant as in day to day man hours. Didn't Thompson use rocking grates, hopper ashpans, electric lighting and self cleaning fireboxes (with kylchap)? As has been mentioned it seems the three sets of valve gear (on pacifics only) actually mean more work on shed than the conjugated gear, but most of his designs seem to reduce labour in locomotive operation or at least intended to.

 

One of the things I have done is to print out all 45 pages of this thread (!) and have been going through it post by post and collating data, arguments, sources and quotations. Why? Well, so much information and many different points of view. Obviously it's not going to go into the actual manuscript but it is helping me a lot in developing my new approach.

One thing is clear - in 2012 when I started this thread, I had several ideas about Thompson. Several of these I have changed my mind on as new evidence has been made available. Some ideas have more evidence now to support them. In both cases I am looking explicitly at questioning my own points of view and seeing if they stand up to scrutiny from others.

One such idea - which I would like to explore more - is that Thompson was influenced by Raven in his locomotive designs.

Looking at Thompson's designs in focus - does anyone feel that this is true? I do not agree with this idea and would be interested to know why others think this. I am aware of the Raven connection and have done a lot of reading the past two weeks on this but the more I look at Thompson's work, the more I am convinced that in the largest engines - the Pacifics and 4-6-0s - he was heavily influenced by Stanier and GWR practice - and in the smaller engines, i.e. D class, K5, K1/1, etc, he is more heavily influenced by the GER and specifically James Holden.

 

One of the things I've been accused of recently is "milking the forum" for writing the book on Edward Thompson I have been working on.

On reflection, that was not (and never has been) my aim but perhaps it has come across so. The discussion has been very fruitful for me and I have had access to many new sources of information I wouldn't have had without the forum. Perhaps some level of compromise would be in order to fully repay those who have contributed to the thread.

I am on what I would call the downward slope towards having a finished book (prior to final editing and formatting) - so with that in mind, I'd like to offer anyone who contributed to this thread, and who is also interested in my Thompson ramblings the opportunity to join a list in order to receive a free electronic copy (I have no intention of printing this book at this time - only for Kindle) when it is finally finished. If you're not a Kindle user, then I would be happy to provide access to a PDF copy instead.

Is that a fair and reasonable response?

 

Nothing like a thread bump just in case anyone had forgotten about your forthcoming tome.

 

I see how this works - I scratch your back, you stick a knife in mine...

No, far from it. I thought I was "doing the right thing" personally speaking. Why so cynical?