Talk:Locomotion No. 1
Add topic | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 27, 2020. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]User:Multihunter Tame has removed the stub -- but I'm not sure how much more of a stub you can get! The JPS 10:44, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC).
Untitled 2
[edit]Shocking level of grammar for such an important locomotive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.159.96 (talk) 17:55, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Names
[edit]I note the statement that Active was subsequently named Locomotion No 1 goes unsupported by a reference. Behrens in British steam Locomotives 1825 - 1925 certainly called it that, but that was in 1927, and it isn't clear that he had the naming rights. As reference 5 notes: "LOCOMOTION was originally called Active and only acquired its number in 1827 and the name LOCOMOTION in the summer of 1833 when it is likely to have acquired cast nameplates on each side of the boiler. The current brass nameplates are later additions." Welding the two together to make its name Locomotion No. 1 seems to have only happened well after it had ceased active service. Unless there is some Wikiprinciple which dictates otherwise, should not that be reflected in the names used to describe what it did in sevice ? The engine now preserved does not match the engine delivered and used for the opening ceremony, but is a valiant Victorian attempt to return an 1850s Locomotion to a state roughly matching its original state/appearance and/ but might reasonably retain the name Locomotion No 1 Rjccumbria (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Rjccumbria: I've never heard of any author called Behrens. Do you mean Ahrons? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:17, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. Sorry, total brainfade led me to substitute the name of somebody I knew yonks ago for Ahrons.. Rjccumbria (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
"Coupling Rods"
[edit]"A pair of cross-heads above the cylinders transmitted the power through a pair of coupling rods, making use of a loose eccentric valve gear." Surely cross-heads to wheels are called "connecting rods", not "coupling rods". The "coupling rods" are the rods that connect the two pairs of driving wheels, also known as "side rods". Bos1812 (talk) 15:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- Trivially true, but confirmed by reference to LOCOMOTION No.1 An Assessment of its History and Modifications Through Archaeological and Archival Study Chapter 19 p 146. I have updated the article. -- Verbarson talkedits 20:37, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks Verbarson for the very quick confirmation and minor correction. This makes the article clearer in suggesting that this locomotive is thought to be the first to use rods to couple the driving wheels (rather than gears for that purpose, used earlier by Trevithick). Thanks again. Bos1812 (talk) 02:36, 1 October 2025 (UTC)