Эдвард Томпсон: Британдық теміржол инженерының өмірі мен қызметі

English railway engineer

Edward Thompson (25 June 1881 – 15 July 1954) was an English railway engineer, and was Chief Mechanical Engineer of the London and North Eastern Railway between 1941 and 1946. Edward Thompson was born at Marlborough, Wiltshire on 25 June 1881. He was the son of Francis Thompson, assistant master at Marlborough College. He was educated at Marlborough before taking the Mechanical Science Tripos at Pembroke College, Cambridge, earning a third class degree. Thompson entered the railway scene after education, contrasting that of his predecessor Nigel Gresley, who had also attended Marlborough after gaining practical experience as a pupil at Horwich Works.

Edward Thompson was born in Marlborough, Wiltshire to Francis Thompson. His grandfather Francis ran a tailoring business in London. He would be educated at Marlborough College, same as his predecessor. After education at Marlborough, he would attend Pembroke College and be influenced by Sir George Stokes, ultimately graduating with a third class degree.

After graduation Thompson worked in both industry and the railways for a while. He worked as a pupil at Beyer, Peacock's drawing office, before moving to work at the Midland Railway's Derby shed. By 1910 he was assistant divisional locomotive superintendent on the North Eastern Railway (NER), in which capacity he gave evidence at the inquiry into the fatal accident between two goods trains at Darlington on 15 November 1910. In 1912 he was appointed Carriage and Wagon Superintendent at Doncaster for the Great Northern Railway (GNR). He served with the Armed Forces during WW1, and was twice mentioned in dispatches, and awarded OBE, Military Division for action at the Battle of Passchendaele. Upon demobilization, he returned to the railways, alternating between the wagon works at Darlington and Doncaster, and consequently between the North Eastern and Great Northern respectively. In 1920 he returned to the NER at York as Carriage and Wagon Superintendent, and joined the LNER upon grouping. He became Workshop Manager at Stratford Works in 1930 and was able to make significant improvements although the works layout prevented major changes there. He would become a Mechanical Engineer at Darlington and Doncaster in 1934 and 1938 respectively, before becoming Chief Mechanical Engineer (CME) of the London and North Eastern Railway (LNER) in 1941 after the death of Nigel Gresley. Edward Thompson would marry Guendolen Raven, daughter of Sir Vincent Raven, CME of the North Eastern Railway. After Guen's death in 1938, he subsequently became very lonely. During World War Two, he met Richard Hardy by chance, who was working on the footplate of a locomotive without permission. He was fond of the boy and the two boarded a train to Doncaster, where Thompson spoke to him with great enthusiasm about ongoing projects. Richard Hardy would join the LNER and become part of Thompson's design team.

Edward Thompson retired in June 1946 after holding the post for 5 years at an age of 65 and was succeeded by Arthur Peppercorn. The first locomotive of his final design, the A2/3, entered traffic on 24 May and was named after its designer, coincidentally as the 2,000th engine constructed at Doncaster. At the naming ceremony, Sir Ronald Matthews paid tribute to the departing CME, thanking him for his service to the company through difficult wartime situation. After retirement, he would regularly attend the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, the MCC and the Oxford and Cambridge University Club at Pall Mall. He would attend lectures at IME, but did not comment, research or present papers himself. He maintained his friendship with other CMEs, such as William Stanier, both of which congratulated each other over new locomotives such as their respective mixed traffic designs, his successor Arthur Peppercorn and former colleague and CME of the Southern Railway Oliver Bulleid, the four together attending the opening of the Rugby Locomotive Testing Station in 1948. He continued to have an interest in the railway scene, taking an interest in British Railways' standardisation scheme developing under Robert Riddles, which mirrored his own ideas and changes implemented during the war. Members of his team, such as Edward Windle, would join the engineering team at BR. He passed away during the night of 14 July 1954 in North Wales, having suffered from severe chest pains. His funeral was held by the Church of England with no friends or relatives present in accordance to his wishes. Most of his estate was passed to his surviving sister and some to his friends.

It has been suggested that the two can be considered as rivals. Had the grouping not taken place, Thompson was in line to become the Chief Mechanical Engineer on the North Eastern Railway, and perhaps even the LNER itself. Given the rivalry between the Great Northern Railway and North Eastern Railway and Gresley's disagreements with Sir Vincent Raven, CME of the NER and father in law to Thompson, this may not have been a far fetched interpretation of Thompson's actions during the war years. In reality, Thompson's view on Gresley is quoted as “the greatest British locomotive engineer since Churchward”. However, he also recognised Gresley's single mindedness in putting design before everything else, such as his specialisation of rolling stock maintenance. It is clear, despite the differences in engineering opinion and approach, Thompson greatly admired Gresley, hoping to refine his predecessor's work. Bert Spencer remarks that Thompson introduced many changes to improve productivity, whereas Gresley and Bulleid placed their attention on locomotive design.

Some have claimed that the LNER board of directors had no immediate successor in mind and went to various railway companies to seek a suitable replacement. Simon A. C. Martin however, in analyzing the LNER board notes of the time, have found no evidence supporting the claim. Engineers that are said to have been approached includes Southern Railway's CME and former colleague Oliver Bulleid, J. F. Harrison, who would go on to design the Duke of Gloucester, fellow Gresley assistant and Thompson's own successor Arthur Peppercorn or future railway historian E. S. Cox. Such tales regarding Peppercorn often suggest that Thompson used his seniority and political experience to sidestep Peppercorn. The LNER board of directors have always discussed upcoming potential appointments, seen through board minutes going back to the 1930s, and there are no such notes for discussion on the role of CME, even with Gresley reaching retirement age by the end of 1941. While this can be interpreted in several ways, an interpretation is that it is expected that Edward Thompson would take over the CME position due to his experience in maintaining locomotive and rolling stock. In 1939, the LNER board formed what became to known as the Emergency Board in order to guide the railway through the war. The board consisted of the directors, stakeholders in addition to engineers and government representatives. Six months before his death, Sir Nigel Gresley fell increasingly ill and failed to attend some of the board meetings when he would be present, instead sending Edward Thompson, Arthur Peppercorn, occasionally J. F. Harrison or a combination of two out of the three. During the meetings, Thompson was acting up in the CME position and Peppercorn as the assistant to the CME. According to LNER board minute 2823, 23 days after Sir Nigel Gresley's passing, the LNER Emergency Board recorded their loss of the great engineer, and in the same meeting, appointed Edward Thompson as CME. The LNER was aware that they had a well rounded engineer in Thompson who could take over in the interim and lead the LNER through the difficult war time conditions.

Thompson disagreed with Gresley on multiple things, and the biggest disagreement between the two would surround the Gresley conjugated valve gear for three cylinder engines. This valve gear arrangement worked well during peacetime but experienced problems due to poor maintenance during the Second World War, giving Thompson justification for his criticism of the design. Thompson himself described the conjugated valve gear as Gresley's only real failure, but noted that Gresley himself would not admit to any failure in his own work. Edward Thompson would present the LNER board with an internal report in 1942 on the development, construction and maintenance of locomotives. He approached Sir William Stanier for a report on the conjugated valve gear fleet, who deputised the report to E. S. Cox. They were shown around LNER locomotive works and parts of the valve gear were presented for inspection. The report was written by Cox and signed off by Stanier, dated 8 June 1942 and titled "'Report on the "2 to 1" Gresley Valve gear on L. N. E. R 3 cylinder locomotives'". In the report, E. S. Cox was critical of the valve gear which was more prone to failure in wartime conditions and provided three broad recommendations: To stop building three cylinder locomotives with conjugated valve gear; To rebuild some of the conjugated locomotives to have three sets of valve gear experimentally; and to modify the existing fleet to remedy the failure prone middle big end. With World War Two significantly reducing available manpower for maintenance and the necessary skills for maintaining the valve gear, Edward Thompson received approval from the board to rebuild some of the more problematic members of Gresley's designs. As a class of six non identical steam locomotives, the P2 class have been a cause of concern as to their low annual mileage and availability when compared to other Gresley Pacifics. Other problems of the class included crank axle failures at low speed, overheating axle boxes, high fuel consumption, cracking at joints in the frames all whilst causing track spreading on the Edinburgh Aberdeen mainline. After having sent the rebuilt W1 4 6 4 locomotive to work with and be compared against the P2 Mikados in Scotland in 1942, the one off experimental was found to be equally capable in pulling trains on the Edinburgh Aberdeen mainline, giving credence to the idea that six coupled locomotives could replace the six non standard locomotives. Thompson proceeded to first experimentally rebuild No. 2005 Thane of Fife as it had the lowest annual mileage and was reputedly the worst of the P2s. The rebuilt locomotive emerged partway through 1943 and achieved 45,732 miles by the end of the year, significantly outperforming the P2s. Arthur Peppercorn presented the board with a report on the operation of the rebuilt locomotive with great praise, and the board approved the rebuilding for the remaining five members. The rebuilds would become some of the best performing locomotives with high mileage and availability. Later, E. S. Cox, who wrote the report arguing against the use of the Gresley Conjugated valve gear, would suggest that Thompson's rebuilding programme was intended to rid the LNER of Gresley's legacy. Such a claim would be repeated until modern day, but is backed with little evidence. In addition, despite other CMEs also rebuilding their predecessor's work, only Thompson's rebuilding programme attracted such a high level of attention and scrutiny, despite similar reasoning.

Perhaps Thompson's greatest controversy is his decision to rebuild pioneer of the Gresley A1 class Great Northern to his design. Some has blamed Thompson for letting his personal feelings towards Gresley cloud his judgement. When in reality, the selection of locomotive was not the CME's decision and was made by the Locomotive Running Superintendent and verified by LNER Finance Department. Such a decision would have been made based on the proposed locomotive's age, total mileage to date, mileage since last shopping and overall condition. As the first Gresley Pacific, Great Northern has been in service since 1922, was in workshop during the time and hence was selected out of expediency. The design of the locomotive still retained Gresley design features, including the Diagram No. 107 boiler also used on A4s, the double Kylchap chimney and draughting arrangements, and externally still resembles a Gresley locomotive. Thompson adopted divided drive on the middle cylinder and had to move the leading wheels forward to accommodate the middle cylinders. The resulting locomotive was by no means a failure, contrary to claims of its poor performance. It was reliable and achieved high mileage, becoming the highest mileage Thompson Pacific by the time of its withdrawal, rivalling Gresley A4s and Peppercorn A1s. Part of the controversy likely stemmed from the loss of the name Great Northern and Thompson's misreading of the sentiment towards the locomotive. Thompson did not like naming engines, and was furious when first of his B1 locomotive No. 8301 was named Springbok in honour of a visit by Jan Smuts. Similarly, when Thane of Fife and other P2 locomotives were rebuilt and entered traffic, their nameplates were not fitted. After entering traffic, Thane of Fife underwent extensive comparative testing on the Scottish section of the LNER against the yet to be rebuilt P2s, after which nameplates would be fitted again. However, the damage was done. Many staff who worked under Gresley and Thompson were from the GNR, and may have feared the loss of the name that represented their origin in addition to the role of the first Gresley Pacific Great Northern in ushering in a new era of glamour and innovation for locomotive design. Thompson may also have intended the pioneer of the Gresley Pacifics to also become the flagship of his own locomotive designs, however his early retirement and Peppercorn's return to conventional design practices meant that his locomotives looked out of place when compared to both his predecessor and successor's engines. Given LNER staff and railway enthusiasts' sentiment towards Great Northern, the distinct design choices of the rebuilt locomotive and the role of the locomotive in locomotive design within the LNER, it is perhaps unsurprising to see Thompson disliked by both his subordinates and enthusiasts.