Talk:Killingworth locomotives

message: I think that "Blucher" should redirect to Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher. After all he wasn`t named after this locomotive. It was the other way around. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.137.121.49 (talk • contribs).
:I think it's absurd that a locomotive which throughout the article is referred to as "Blücher" (note the umlaut) should have "Blucher" as its title. I don't want to interfere here without asking for other people's opinions, but what is going on here? <KF> 18:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. That's exactly what I would do. Lots of redirects to be considered though. <KF> 19:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't notice the date on the first comment above, so I thought there were more people involved in the discussion.  Anyway, the move is done and I've gone through updating the redirects as appropriate. Slambo (Speak) 19:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: While the originator of the blast nozzle is in some doubt, it is quite clear from Trevithick's own writing
that he turned the exhaust up the chimney and observed the improved draught. I have therefore excised the following
sentence from the article, pending discussion:
"Stephenson was not satisfied with the Blücher’s performance, but the lessons learned from its design allowed him to develop the steam blast, which allowed exhaust steam to go up the chimney, pulling air behind it and increasing draught. This greatly improved performance on subsequent models."
Globbet (talk) 23:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blast Pipe 

message: : "83 Years Old and Still 'In Harness'"
: "The above engine was constructed in 1822 and is at the present time at work in the County of Durham."
Anyone care to comment on this photo?  Andy Dingley (talk) 00:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering about that too, but I've managed to track this beast down. Sadly its age appears to have been exaggerated, though its design is certainly archaic. It's now owned by the National Railway Museum, which has loaned it to the Beamish Museum. NRM's page on it claims it was originally built by Stephenson and Nicholas Wood for Hetton Colliery in 1822 and remained in service until 1912. However, its claimed 1822 origin appears to have been a misunderstanding which was not corrected for a long time. According to Beamish Museum, which calls it "Hetton Lyon", it was actually built by the colliery in 1851-52 (see, for example, this Beamish Flickr entry, these blog postings, and this article). Its design used much older techniques, which is what had misled earlier researchers. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 02:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting, thanks.  Certainly an archaic design for the 1850s!  Probably worth an article here too. Does Hetton Lyon have enough credibility to use as a name? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't vouch for it based on what I've found. The Beamish Museum would probably know more. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 19:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1822 loco still working in 1905? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Killingworth locomotives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309164519/http://www.tynelives.org.uk/stephenson/exhibits.htm to http://www.tynelives.org.uk/stephenson/exhibits.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061205042721/http://sapiensman.com/old_trains/english.htm to http://www.sapiensman.com/old_trains/english.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:42, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is this article about Blucher, or the more common Killingworth types, with chain coupling rather than gears? The image change today is quite unrepresentative for those. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:11, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, I've moved the Blucher picture down and restored the drawing of the chain coupling locos Railfan23 (talk) 21:41, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image change