![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
on the purchase of Lonodn bridge: seems the Arizonas knew what they were getting: http://www.arizonahandbook.com/lake.htm
This page needs attention. It seems some edits/bots have removed much of the content. The page should be reverted (imo) to the December 29 00:07UTC version, and the interwiki links re-added. -- RealGrouchy 18:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
[[:Image:Tower Bridge from Queen's Walk.jpg|thumb|250px|A view of the Tower Bridge from The Queen's Walk.]] I have removed this photograph (and placed it in the gallery) because it is too obviously tilted. Acceptable if we don't have anything else, but we got lots. If the original uploader could correct this and reload it, then it should go back in because it is a great photograph of the bridge otherwise. -- Surgeonsmate 23:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
There seem to be too many photographs showing exactly the same thing in the gallery section - what do people think about trimming it down a bit (or at least moving them to the talk page until the article is longer) ? Megapixie 02:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I think Fergie knows the difference between London Bridge.
and Tower Bridge.
GSX-R bikes where allowed through the Tower Subway? TecTec 22:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Section seems to be a bit of a mess, combination of quotes from when it was relatively new, the Tower bridge Experience, the effect on Tower Subway, and the intro of a computer system. Split into different sections, or reword? rename this section? Paulbrock 21:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
The, so-called, Schematic plan of Tower Bridge is not a plan. It is an elevation... 82.38.112.68 21:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)mikeL
Now I'm sure you don't really mean that Sir John Jackson (MP) built the foundations all by himself? I copied the text here as I could not see how to add the information differently, without additional information. For example, what was the name of the contracting company? Was Sir John responsible for the design of the foundations as well? etc.
EdJogg 12:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
That's much better. Sorry, I tend to read things literally! (Does help when proof-reading, although others don't often see the joke!) Adding the other contractors certainly helps, although I think there's still room for improvement, just can't quite put my finger on how.
EdJogg 20:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Arrol, Armstrong, Jackson & Webster all gave their names to their respective companies, but the 5th company involved was Perry & Co. Bartlett was to give his name to the Bartlett School of Architecture, but not to the company which had the contract for the superstructure stonework. Maybe the 5 contracts could be clarified by adding that Webster did the south bank foundations etc, Perry the superstructure stonework, and Arrol the steel frame. Angeladunster ( talk) 23:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Sadly there are no ancient rights associated with this bridge constructed in 1886 between Tower Hamlets and Southwark. The canard arises because Freemen pay no tolls on London Bridge for a specified list of livestock. There is no legal right, as such. The only right Freeman have that is enshrined in law, is to be hanged with a silken rope (apparently, it makes it quicker, although I suspect it could take yer 'ead off). Kbthompson 13:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Doing a google for "Tower Bridge" operation revealed a lot of very interesting web pages. Still nothing about how the hydraulic system itself works, but some other good stuff. These need to be incorporated as references, rather than just links...
There were many more, but it will take a while to absorb the useful info from this lot first!
EdJogg 15:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Useful entry on the Engineering Timelines website ( http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=131) which includes a number of engineering / constructional details not already in article.
EdJogg ( talk) 14:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
-- EdJogg ( talk) 12:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Found this while seeing if I could find a picture of the painting of the Hawker Hunter incident...
(NB - Official Site history page has some notes about previous bridge paint colours, which can be incorporated here...)
EdJogg ( talk) 16:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
There's something wrong with footnote 22.-- 76.167.77.165 ( talk) 02:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Might it be better to say that Horace Jones recommended that the Corporation commission Sir John Wolfe Barry to work with him? ... rather than "Jones' engineer", which implies that he was working for Jones. JWB was by this time an eminent and independent consultant, and in fact much of the nitty gritty was done by his colleague Henry Marc Brunel, Isambard's son. In asking that he should be able to work with Barry, Jones managed to upset the Corporation's own leading engineer, Colonel William Haywood, a man he had been unable to get on with in the past, and who certainly felt himself passed over for a role that should have been his. The bascule idea was Jones' - Barry & Brunel came up with the operating or opening system. It may be a little misleading to say that Stevenson took over the project after Jones' death. He had been Jones's assistant in the Architect's Office, and certainly produced the drawings and designs that give the bridge the appearance that we recognise today, but by then it was Wolfe who was in control, directing the works. It was he who reported to, and was held responsible by, the various Corporation committees. Angeladunster ( talk) 23:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
on the purchase of Lonodn bridge: seems the Arizonas knew what they were getting: http://www.arizonahandbook.com/lake.htm
This page needs attention. It seems some edits/bots have removed much of the content. The page should be reverted (imo) to the December 29 00:07UTC version, and the interwiki links re-added. -- RealGrouchy 18:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
[[:Image:Tower Bridge from Queen's Walk.jpg|thumb|250px|A view of the Tower Bridge from The Queen's Walk.]] I have removed this photograph (and placed it in the gallery) because it is too obviously tilted. Acceptable if we don't have anything else, but we got lots. If the original uploader could correct this and reload it, then it should go back in because it is a great photograph of the bridge otherwise. -- Surgeonsmate 23:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
There seem to be too many photographs showing exactly the same thing in the gallery section - what do people think about trimming it down a bit (or at least moving them to the talk page until the article is longer) ? Megapixie 02:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I think Fergie knows the difference between London Bridge.
and Tower Bridge.
GSX-R bikes where allowed through the Tower Subway? TecTec 22:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Section seems to be a bit of a mess, combination of quotes from when it was relatively new, the Tower bridge Experience, the effect on Tower Subway, and the intro of a computer system. Split into different sections, or reword? rename this section? Paulbrock 21:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
The, so-called, Schematic plan of Tower Bridge is not a plan. It is an elevation... 82.38.112.68 21:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)mikeL
Now I'm sure you don't really mean that Sir John Jackson (MP) built the foundations all by himself? I copied the text here as I could not see how to add the information differently, without additional information. For example, what was the name of the contracting company? Was Sir John responsible for the design of the foundations as well? etc.
EdJogg 12:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
That's much better. Sorry, I tend to read things literally! (Does help when proof-reading, although others don't often see the joke!) Adding the other contractors certainly helps, although I think there's still room for improvement, just can't quite put my finger on how.
EdJogg 20:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Arrol, Armstrong, Jackson & Webster all gave their names to their respective companies, but the 5th company involved was Perry & Co. Bartlett was to give his name to the Bartlett School of Architecture, but not to the company which had the contract for the superstructure stonework. Maybe the 5 contracts could be clarified by adding that Webster did the south bank foundations etc, Perry the superstructure stonework, and Arrol the steel frame. Angeladunster ( talk) 23:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Sadly there are no ancient rights associated with this bridge constructed in 1886 between Tower Hamlets and Southwark. The canard arises because Freemen pay no tolls on London Bridge for a specified list of livestock. There is no legal right, as such. The only right Freeman have that is enshrined in law, is to be hanged with a silken rope (apparently, it makes it quicker, although I suspect it could take yer 'ead off). Kbthompson 13:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Doing a google for "Tower Bridge" operation revealed a lot of very interesting web pages. Still nothing about how the hydraulic system itself works, but some other good stuff. These need to be incorporated as references, rather than just links...
There were many more, but it will take a while to absorb the useful info from this lot first!
EdJogg 15:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Useful entry on the Engineering Timelines website ( http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=131) which includes a number of engineering / constructional details not already in article.
EdJogg ( talk) 14:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
-- EdJogg ( talk) 12:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Found this while seeing if I could find a picture of the painting of the Hawker Hunter incident...
(NB - Official Site history page has some notes about previous bridge paint colours, which can be incorporated here...)
EdJogg ( talk) 16:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
There's something wrong with footnote 22.-- 76.167.77.165 ( talk) 02:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Might it be better to say that Horace Jones recommended that the Corporation commission Sir John Wolfe Barry to work with him? ... rather than "Jones' engineer", which implies that he was working for Jones. JWB was by this time an eminent and independent consultant, and in fact much of the nitty gritty was done by his colleague Henry Marc Brunel, Isambard's son. In asking that he should be able to work with Barry, Jones managed to upset the Corporation's own leading engineer, Colonel William Haywood, a man he had been unable to get on with in the past, and who certainly felt himself passed over for a role that should have been his. The bascule idea was Jones' - Barry & Brunel came up with the operating or opening system. It may be a little misleading to say that Stevenson took over the project after Jones' death. He had been Jones's assistant in the Architect's Office, and certainly produced the drawings and designs that give the bridge the appearance that we recognise today, but by then it was Wolfe who was in control, directing the works. It was he who reported to, and was held responsible by, the various Corporation committees. Angeladunster ( talk) 23:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)