JIC Boyd? Famous in Talyllyn circles for lovely photos and ‘unreliable’ words! Had a tendency to, er, make stuff up… ‘Boydisms’ are a known thing where he’d just invent facts.
[citation needed]
I was always given to understand that, if it was in Boyd, it was correct. What 'facts' is he supposed to have invented?
JIC Boyd? Famous in Talyllyn circles for lovely photos and ‘unreliable’ words! Had a tendency to, er, make stuff up… ‘Boydisms’ are a known thing where he’d just invent facts.
[citation needed]
I was always given to understand that, if it was in Boyd, it was correct. What 'facts' is he supposed to have invented?
Which of his books would you like filleted? Seriously, I’ll send you via PM, because it’s lengthy, a post from a recent author who has revisited the subject of just one of them.
A recent historian of the Talyllyn has said (from memory) something like ‘the problem with Boyd is not that he’s always wrong, it’s knowing when he’s right’
JIC Boyd? Famous in Talyllyn circles for lovely photos and ‘unreliable’ words! Had a tendency to, er, make stuff up… ‘Boydisms’ are a known thing where he’d just invent facts.
[citation needed]
I was always given to understand that, if it was in Boyd, it was correct. What 'facts' is he supposed to have invented?
Which of his books would you like filleted? Seriously, I’ll send you via PM, because it’s lengthy, a post from a recent author who has revisited the subject of just one of them.
A recent historian of the Talyllyn has said (from memory) something like ‘the problem with Boyd is not that he’s always wrong, it’s knowing when he’s right’
I have replied to your PM, and will not pursue this matter further on this or any other board.
Ok. You did ask for evidence and have been given it, privately.
I am frankly astonished at the tone, both here and in your PM to me, with which you are closing down a response you actually asked for. Which was given respectfully and conversationally to you.
You may now again seek the last word, but I must be allowed the right to respond where I feel that I have been treated shabbily in public.
Well, that's up to you. I will say, however, that I replied courteously (if briefly) to your PM, as I felt that the discussion might well end up becoming inappropriately Hellish.
Oh... Hang on there! There aren't enough of us here to lose any of our brethren and not have them be badly missed. We (speaking for myself) all get grumpy over some issues, and the usual cure is to leave them alone for a while and let other things arise and take over. I do hope a peace treaty - spoken or unspoken - can be floated among us.
Ok. You did ask for evidence and have been given it, privately.
I am frankly astonished at the tone, both here and in your PM to me, with which you are closing down a response you actually asked for. Which was given respectfully and conversationally to you.
You may now again seek the last word, but I must be allowed the right to respond where I feel that I have been treated shabbily in public.
And with that, goodbye Ship of Fools.
Hey! I'm really sorry (genuine, now) that I brought the guy up. I'd be interested in errata (by PM) too, as I am interested in the N.Wales stuff. But OK - I went off in a bit of a huff a while back when someone had something of a go at me; I do hope you'll come back. all the best, Mark, Manchester
I too have Boyd's Talyllyn Railway on the shelf here, and would be interested in learning what's wrong with it, but at this distance it's not something worth getting heated about.
I too have Boyd's Talyllyn Railway on the shelf here, and would be interested in learning what's wrong with it, but at this distance it's not something worth getting heated about.
Indeed it isn't. I've sent you a PM, for clarification from my POV.
Boyd did not have all the information that is now at our disposal. I am tempted to say that this is a common issue for all historians. New stuff is found all the time - despite some people thinking history is a thing that is fixed and immutable.
As an aside, the J.M. Lloyd who produced many of the drawings in Boyd's works, was my woodwork teacher at school. I knew him, Horatio. Though he was not a fellow of infinite jest, he was a fine draughtsman. He knew his local history, too.
On the other hand, the age of really great railway historians seems to have passed. Most railway books now are just albums of pictures.
The exceptions are those published by Black Dwarf/Lightmoor. And formerly, those by RCL. The latter now command astonishing prices on the second-hand market, especially the book on the Leek and Manifold, which I recently saw offered at north of £500! (It's a lovely book,mind, but...)
Those Lightmoor books should have a government health warning on the cover. Lead us not into (more) temptation.
The element necessarily missing from new histories is the "I was there" author, though perhaps a new generation of them is even now being generated - I don't know. I'll grab anything I can find that was written by anyone who was inhaling smoke and steam and hot oil a century ago. But if we are looking for detailed company histories, that takes meticulous researchers with time on their hands, access to records that may not always have been available, and that rarest of all beasts, a publisher who believes in editing, fact checking and proof reading.
For anyone interested in a worthy monument for their layout: Here's Isambard Kingdom Brunel in a variety of scales!
I love it!
Yes, it's a fine representation of The Great Man. IIRC, it's based on the photos taken of IKB during the long and difficult experience he went through when his third ship, the Great Eastern, was being built at Millwall. This was, in fact, during the last year or so of his life (1858-1859), and, despite his jaunty and confident appearance, he was already a very sick man.
L T C Rolt's biography goes into this period in some detail, and one can only marvel at the indomitable spirit of IKB, which saw him through to the launching of his 'Great Ship', and the completion of the Royal Albert Bridge at Saltash, but which finally left him before the ship made her triumphant maiden voyage to New York.
There will, of course, be those who belittle IKB and his achievements - and there were some spectacular mistakes*, too - but every giant of science, art, or whatever, suffers the same.
(*NOT the Atmospheric Railway system used on the South Devon for a time - IKB did not invent that system, but did, in fact, try to improve upon it. Time, the SDR Directors, and lack of £££ were all against him).
(It's better to hear straight from the enthusiast's mouth than from Wikipedia.)
Perhaps his most egregious mistake was his ridiculous specifications for the first Great Western locomotives - you'd do well to refer to MacDermot's history for full details, but they started off with an incredible collection of freaks...apart from a couple of competent engines (including North Star ) from Stephenson's, intended for a 5 foot 6 inch gauge line in South America, but available, and suitable for re-gauging.
IKB had the good sense to choose the very young Daniel Gooch as Locomotive Superintendent, with the happy result that when the line was open all the way to Exeter, the GWR was running the fastest trains in the world.
It might also be argued that his Broad Gauge was in itself a mistake, although at the time it seemed like a good idea. IKB appears to have overlooked the problems associated with break-of-gauge stations, or perhaps envisaged (hoped ?) that the broad gauge would become the norm. The GWR came along too late for that to happen, though other eminent engineers were recorded as saying that, if starting again, they'd go for 5-foot gauge or slightly wider. The Stephenson 'coal-cart' gauge became the norm almost by accident, but that, maybe, is subject for another rabbit-hole thread.
Using the Atmospheric System on the South Devon also seemed like a good idea at the time, given the success achieved on the lines at Dalkey, and on the London & Croydon, but the SDR was not perhaps a suitable route. Atmospheric trains worked well enough on short suburban lines, with frequent passenger trains, but the logistics of mixing commuter trains with freight trains, and longer-distance passenger trains, proved difficult to solve.
I refer you to Charles Hadfield's seminal work Atmospheric Railways for a full account of this fascinating 19thC railway rabbit-hole...
I can't offhand think of any civil engineering work of IKB that wasn't entirely successful.
If ever there was a vision of Heaven on Earth, this it. The Deltics were a big part of my early years, and just about everyone who didn't care about railways must have heard about them - they changed so much about rail travel. I was lucky a couple of times, seeing the prototype on a freight with a dynamometer car on an early ECML trial through Stevenage (60s?) and later seeing a production Deltic roaring past Cadwell on the first run of the Talisman with the XP64 train set - I caught them both with the old Brownie box camera. There is no sound outside a concert hall as glorious
I honked the horn on Tulyar at an open day at Chart Leacon depot around 1985, but she wasn't running at the time. At least, I think I'd have remembered if she was.
The think that struck me most about Brunel on reading Rolt's biography was just how well he got on with Stephenson. I'd been taught about the great gauge rivalry and assumed they'd been enemies but, judging by the letters Rolt quoted, they actually got on linke a house on fire.
Brunel and Stephenson had very different ideas about many things, but they recognised each other's greatness, and respected it.
Another major mistake by IKB - his original permanent-way for the Great Western, using timber baulks, piles, and longitudinal rails. It proved very hard and unyielding (to the discomfort of the Directors and the first passengers), and had to be speedily modified.
There was inevitably a lot of trial and error in the early days! For instance the Dee bridge on Robert Stephenson's Chester and Holyhead railway collapsed in 1847 with fatal results. The weakness of cast iron under stress was relatively unknown, the effects of torsional stress completely unknown. Perhaps Stephenson was lulled by the stability of Telford's cast-iron Pontcysyllte aqueduct which stands to this day - but a canal bridge is subject to different stresses.
Thinking of more recent "learning issues": no-one realised how the cycles of aircraft cabin pressurisation cause metal fatigue, especially at sharp corners, hence the 1950s Comet disasters).
The Dee Bridge collapse is mentioned in some detail in Rolt's Red For Danger.
As you say, lots of trial and error in those early days - the mistakes of IKB I've already mentioned show how lessons were learned, often at some cost.
I think even the greatest railway engineers had their blind spots, and certainly in the field of traction, they almost all engaged in experimentation, some of which did not work out.
I'm not sure that Gresley's love of conjugated valve gear was his greatest moment. It was certainly an unnecessary complication in that big Garratt (which was only built to shove coal wagons up a hill), which contributed to its unpopularity among the maintenance staff at Mexborough shed.
Conversely, the Lickey Banker was a success when carrying out its allotted task (i.e, short distance big heave), but failed when tried out on Toton-London coal trains as it "ran out of breath". Apparently it had four cylinders but only two sets of valves which led to poor steam flow - not a problem in such a low-speed loco.
I always wonder why the Midland never tried out the S&D 2-8-0s on the main line coal trains, though - would have been better than two 0-6-0s, surely?
Conversely, the Lickey Banker was a success when carrying out its allotted task (i.e, short distance big heave), but failed when tried out on Toton-London coal trains as it "ran out of breath". Apparently it had four cylinders but only two sets of valves which led to poor steam flow - not a problem in such a low-speed loco.
I always wonder why the Midland never tried out the S&D 2-8-0s on the main line coal trains, though - would have been better than two 0-6-0s, surely?
Apparently they did - from the Wikipedia article on the class:
The success of the class on the Mendip hills prompted the Midland Railway to experiment with their use on the East Midlands coal trains, but they were less satisfactory in this role. The route did not utilise their design for climbing hills, and there were issues of fuel efficiency, with considerable amounts of high quality coal consumed.
Neither did I, but it would have been odd (I think) if they hadn't tried the 7Fs on the coal trains.
Presumably they used more coal than the usual two 0-6-0s together, but there would surely have been a saving in enginemen's wages - one crew per train, rather than two. Maybe the Midland was afraid of the possible consequences of laying-off footplate staff?
Comments
[citation needed]
I was always given to understand that, if it was in Boyd, it was correct. What 'facts' is he supposed to have invented?
Which of his books would you like filleted? Seriously, I’ll send you via PM, because it’s lengthy, a post from a recent author who has revisited the subject of just one of them.
A recent historian of the Talyllyn has said (from memory) something like ‘the problem with Boyd is not that he’s always wrong, it’s knowing when he’s right’
I have replied to your PM, and will not pursue this matter further on this or any other board.
I am frankly astonished at the tone, both here and in your PM to me, with which you are closing down a response you actually asked for. Which was given respectfully and conversationally to you.
You may now again seek the last word, but I must be allowed the right to respond where I feel that I have been treated shabbily in public.
And with that, goodbye Ship of Fools.
Hey! I'm really sorry (genuine, now) that I brought the guy up. I'd be interested in errata (by PM) too, as I am interested in the N.Wales stuff. But OK - I went off in a bit of a huff a while back when someone had something of a go at me; I do hope you'll come back. all the best, Mark, Manchester
Indeed it isn't. I've sent you a PM, for clarification from my POV.
As an aside, the J.M. Lloyd who produced many of the drawings in Boyd's works, was my woodwork teacher at school. I knew him, Horatio. Though he was not a fellow of infinite jest, he was a fine draughtsman. He knew his local history, too.
The exceptions are those published by Black Dwarf/Lightmoor. And formerly, those by RCL. The latter now command astonishing prices on the second-hand market, especially the book on the Leek and Manifold, which I recently saw offered at north of £500! (It's a lovely book,mind, but...)
The element necessarily missing from new histories is the "I was there" author, though perhaps a new generation of them is even now being generated - I don't know. I'll grab anything I can find that was written by anyone who was inhaling smoke and steam and hot oil a century ago. But if we are looking for detailed company histories, that takes meticulous researchers with time on their hands, access to records that may not always have been available, and that rarest of all beasts, a publisher who believes in editing, fact checking and proof reading.
I love it!
As do I! My choice of tour of Kensal Green Cemetery was strongly influenced by the opportunity to see this: https://flic.kr/p/82kujP
Yes, it's a fine representation of The Great Man. IIRC, it's based on the photos taken of IKB during the long and difficult experience he went through when his third ship, the Great Eastern, was being built at Millwall. This was, in fact, during the last year or so of his life (1858-1859), and, despite his jaunty and confident appearance, he was already a very sick man.
L T C Rolt's biography goes into this period in some detail, and one can only marvel at the indomitable spirit of IKB, which saw him through to the launching of his 'Great Ship', and the completion of the Royal Albert Bridge at Saltash, but which finally left him before the ship made her triumphant maiden voyage to New York.
There will, of course, be those who belittle IKB and his achievements - and there were some spectacular mistakes*, too - but every giant of science, art, or whatever, suffers the same.
(*NOT the Atmospheric Railway system used on the South Devon for a time - IKB did not invent that system, but did, in fact, try to improve upon it. Time, the SDR Directors, and lack of £££ were all against him).
(It's better to hear straight from the enthusiast's mouth than from Wikipedia.)
Perhaps his most egregious mistake was his ridiculous specifications for the first Great Western locomotives - you'd do well to refer to MacDermot's history for full details, but they started off with an incredible collection of freaks...apart from a couple of competent engines (including North Star ) from Stephenson's, intended for a 5 foot 6 inch gauge line in South America, but available, and suitable for re-gauging.
IKB had the good sense to choose the very young Daniel Gooch as Locomotive Superintendent, with the happy result that when the line was open all the way to Exeter, the GWR was running the fastest trains in the world.
It might also be argued that his Broad Gauge was in itself a mistake, although at the time it seemed like a good idea. IKB appears to have overlooked the problems associated with break-of-gauge stations, or perhaps envisaged (hoped ?) that the broad gauge would become the norm. The GWR came along too late for that to happen, though other eminent engineers were recorded as saying that, if starting again, they'd go for 5-foot gauge or slightly wider. The Stephenson 'coal-cart' gauge became the norm almost by accident, but that, maybe, is subject for another rabbit-hole thread.
Using the Atmospheric System on the South Devon also seemed like a good idea at the time, given the success achieved on the lines at Dalkey, and on the London & Croydon, but the SDR was not perhaps a suitable route. Atmospheric trains worked well enough on short suburban lines, with frequent passenger trains, but the logistics of mixing commuter trains with freight trains, and longer-distance passenger trains, proved difficult to solve.
I refer you to Charles Hadfield's seminal work Atmospheric Railways for a full account of this fascinating 19thC railway rabbit-hole...
I can't offhand think of any civil engineering work of IKB that wasn't entirely successful.
If ever there was a vision of Heaven on Earth, this it. The Deltics were a big part of my early years, and just about everyone who didn't care about railways must have heard about them - they changed so much about rail travel. I was lucky a couple of times, seeing the prototype on a freight with a dynamometer car on an early ECML trial through Stevenage (60s?) and later seeing a production Deltic roaring past Cadwell on the first run of the Talisman with the XP64 train set - I caught them both with the old Brownie box camera. There is no sound outside a concert hall as glorious
The think that struck me most about Brunel on reading Rolt's biography was just how well he got on with Stephenson. I'd been taught about the great gauge rivalry and assumed they'd been enemies but, judging by the letters Rolt quoted, they actually got on linke a house on fire.
Another major mistake by IKB - his original permanent-way for the Great Western, using timber baulks, piles, and longitudinal rails. It proved very hard and unyielding (to the discomfort of the Directors and the first passengers), and had to be speedily modified.
Thinking of more recent "learning issues": no-one realised how the cycles of aircraft cabin pressurisation cause metal fatigue, especially at sharp corners, hence the 1950s Comet disasters).
As you say, lots of trial and error in those early days - the mistakes of IKB I've already mentioned show how lessons were learned, often at some cost.
I'm not sure that Gresley's love of conjugated valve gear was his greatest moment. It was certainly an unnecessary complication in that big Garratt (which was only built to shove coal wagons up a hill), which contributed to its unpopularity among the maintenance staff at Mexborough shed.
I always wonder why the Midland never tried out the S&D 2-8-0s on the main line coal trains, though - would have been better than two 0-6-0s, surely?
Apparently they did - from the Wikipedia article on the class:
The success of the class on the Mendip hills prompted the Midland Railway to experiment with their use on the East Midlands coal trains, but they were less satisfactory in this role. The route did not utilise their design for climbing hills, and there were issues of fuel efficiency, with considerable amounts of high quality coal consumed.
Presumably they used more coal than the usual two 0-6-0s together, but there would surely have been a saving in enginemen's wages - one crew per train, rather than two. Maybe the Midland was afraid of the possible consequences of laying-off footplate staff?