Excitement and intruige!
|
I wholeheartedly disagree with the other review i'm afraid, this is a wonderful book, which while unearthing new theories and evidence to support its claims, verges on reading like a novel. Albeit with a pleasant tone in dry wit. McKean makes a fascinating read and this book makes a fabulous addition to any collection especially if one has the previous book, 'The Scottish Chateau' which was equally as fascinating and provocative of debate. While not discounting the points made by the good Dr above (or below depending on where this appears), perhaps he should approach the author directly to help calm his concerns as the book does answer these points, but having had the pleasure of meeting the author in the past, i can say i am sure he would be more then happy to deal with each of these accusations against his theory/discovery in an equally informative, enjoyable and affable way as he does in his literature.
Roll on the next one!
|
|
house of cards
|
|
The Tay bridge disaster of 1879 was a turning point in the development of the railways in late Victorian Britain. It changed the public perception of engineers and engineering projects, and much had to be done to reassure the travelling public that they could travel safely by train. The accident was the worst ever to afflict the UK railway system, and still remains the worst structural disaster in Britain. It is thus an important subject for historical analysis, and one which has been tackled by many authors over the years. The modern phase of analysis starts with Prebble's book of 1955 (The High Girders), followed by John Thomas (New Light on the Tragedy, 1972), David Swinfen (Fall of the Tay Bridge, 1994) and Lewis (Beautiful Railway Bridge of the Silvery Tay, 2004). In tackling the topc, McKean adopts a different approach to earlier authors by examining the history of the competition between the Caledonian and North British Railways, and does a fair job of summarising the main conflicts between the two companies. It was a cut-throat business in capturing Scottish railway travellers, and costs were too frequently pared to the bone in new projects. The Tay bridge represents the culmination of that competition, a project to cross the 2 mile estuary of the Tay in one bound. While much of this new book is well researched, the chapter on the Tay bridge disaster lacks such an approach because the evidence from the accident itself has not been considered thoroughly. Indeed the blurb on the back cover proudly announces a "new" theory, that the train derailed and so brought the bridge down. It is not new at all, and was in fact put forward by Bouch (the bridge engineer) himself at the subsequent inquiry. It was rejected by the inquiry, and has few proponents in the modern analysis of the structural failure. Witness statements not seen by the inquiry were unearthed by Thomas in 1972, who discussed the evidence of a faulty twisted rail in the high girder section at some length in his book. Mckean also indicts the chair of the inquiry, Henry Rothery, for not conducting it fairly. The evidence for this assertion is weak, Bouch being given ample opportunities to defend himself. The inquiry showed that the design and construction were indeed faulty, Bouch himself admitting many of the design faults (such as the notorious coned lugs). Careful examination of the surviving evidence shows that the high girder section was swaying from side-to-side during the months before the accident, and that the structure had deteriorated to a very dangerous condition well before the final collapse. It is unfortunate that McKean fails to consider all the recent evidence of the accident, marring an otherwise good account of the disaster. Instead, we are given a fanciful theory about the train striking the side of the bridge, and so bringing half-a-mile of bridge down. If derailment did occur, the bridge must have been in a parlous state to have collapsed like a house of cards.
|
|
|
United States | 
United Kingdom | 
Canada