Talk:R. B. Longridge and Company

Trains: in UK / Locomotives Mid‑importance

	Trains Portal
DYK	June 14, 2012

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

This article lacks references.

Crampton locomotives

Sources differ on how many Crampton locomotives Longridge built for the Great Northern Railway. Number 200 was later converted from a 4-2-0 to a conventional 2-2-2. There were nine similar 2-2-2 locomotives numbered 91-99 and it is uncertain whether these were built as 2-2-2 or whether they were converted from 4-2-0 like number 200. Biscuittin (talk) 22:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't followed this all through, and I hope I'm not teaching my granny to suck eggs. But don't confuse the Stephenson Long Boiler with the Crampton. After the first few models, the Long Boiler was a 4-2-0 to give greater stability, like the "Great A". The distinguishing feature of the Crampton was that the driving wheels were behind the firebox. Chevin (talk) 09:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your definition of a Crampton but I think we are talking about different things. GNR 200 was built as a Crampton and converted to a non-Crampton. Did GNR 91-99 receive the same treatment or were they built as non-Cramptons? Biscuittin (talk) 16:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only have Lowe for a reference. He says ten Cramptons were built for the GNR and "they" were subsequently converted to 2-2-2 by Archibald Sturrock. I only wanted to post a note somewhere, as I had noticed a number of amendments about Cramptons in various articles, and saw a trap for the less knowledgable. Chevin (talk) 08:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Longridge and Gooch

I am investigating the connection between the Longridge and Gooch families for a Wikipedia article, ref:[1]. Biscuittin (talk) 15:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See John Viret Gooch. Biscuittin (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Longridge and Bedlington Ironworks

Were R. B. Longridge and Company and the Bedlington Ironworks the same company? This reference seems to suggest that they were.[2] Biscuittin (talk) 17:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Longridge

There seem to have been at least three Michael Longridges (ML). ML1 purchased the Bedlington Ironworks in 1785. ML2 (born 1785) was the son of ML1. ML3 (1847-1928) was the son of James Atkinson Longridge.[3] Biscuittin (talk) 18:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is wrong and there were only two Michael Longridges. The person who bought Bedlington Ironworks (between 1782 and 1788) was Thomas Longridge, uncle of Michael senior. Biscuittin (talk) 09:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Start date

According to this [4] R. B. Longridge and Company was established in 1838 by Michael Longridge (1785-1858) under the direction of Robert Bewick Longridge, who was Michael's fourth son. This accounts for the initials R.B. but does not accord with a founding date of 1785. Biscuittin (talk) 16:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1785 accords fairly well with 1788, the date William Hawks and Thomas Longridge (uncle of Michael) took over Bedlington Ironworks. I'm inclined to think that R. B. Longridge and Company was a separate company set up in 1838 specifically to build locomotives. Biscuittin (talk) 16:27, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a reference [5] for the 1838 start date, so I have re-written the lead section accordingly. Biscuittin (talk) 18:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Company name

I was puzzled that Michael Longridge named the company after his son, rather than himself. Then I realised that George Stephenson did the same with Robert Stephenson and Company. Perhaps it was a common practice at the time. Biscuittin (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]