Further illumination
Joseph Swan and Thomas Edison had both been involved in the development of electric lighting, from different sides of the Atlantic and with a degree of rivalry (Archive, PE December).
Even so, a joint enterprise called the Edison and Swan Electric Light Company was set up in 1883, and it had an office in London. It was a couple of years before the Savoy Theatre in London became the first public building to be electrically lit. The performance of the lights at the Savoy was as expected but the generator turned out to be inadequate and was replaced.
It is noted in the article that Swan became a member of the IMechE in 1884. At that time the IMechE existed alongside the Society of Telegraph Engineers and Electricians, which in 1889 became the Institution of Electrical Engineers.
J C Jones, Aberdeen
Costume drama
Archive got its facts slightly wrong (PE December). Swan’s fairy lights were not used to illuminate the Savoy Theatre but were used as part of the costumes of the fairies on stage in the Gilbert and Sullivan comic operetta Iolanthe. Hence the term fairy lights.
The theatre was illuminated by Swan’s bulbs but of larger size than the fairy lights used on stage. A double first in fact!
Irvine Bell, Lytham St Anne’s, Lancs
Hands-off management
How refreshing to read Dr David Landsman’s remark about Tata (“Passage from India,” PE November) that “We do recognise there are geographical differences, and it’s important to let managers manage in a way that suits the location.”
Would it not be wonderful if central government applied this to local government and the NHS?
John Stoton, Barnham, Sussex
Safety will be built in
I feel compelled to respond to the anti-nuclear letter from John Sharp (PE December). Nuclear site licensees have an absolute obligation to meet the risk and public safety criteria defined by the law and enforced by the Office for Nuclear Regulation. There is no credible case that these legal commitments can be circumvented to increase profitability.
It is very probable that some of the new small reactors will use small particulate fuels that have high proliferation resistance, rather than large multi-pin fuel assemblies. However, even if light water designs are used, the technology is well-established/low risk. And small reactors would have additional passive safety features compared with large designs, permitting them to be sited close to population centres.
In addition, small reactors are able to operate at full power for at least two years before refuelling. This is a great advantage for isolated communities that are not grid-connected but who seek the same 99.98% continuity of supply that is available to the rest of us and is almost impossible with renewable generation.
Paul Spare, Davenham
Risks posed by HS2
I’m afraid that Dr Peter Primrose is misinformed about High-Speed 2 (Letters, PE December). HS2 would be largely disconnected from the current network, so train paths could only be freed up at the expense of cities like Coventry (which are considered to be over-provided). The plan is to release one train path an hour through the West Midlands, where traffic is limited by platform space, junctions, and franchising restrictions, not track capacity.
With regard to airports, HS2 was backed by the aviation lobby as it was thought likely to increase flights from Birmingham and Manchester, not reduce them.
The original supporters of HS2 stressed the importance of the direct link to HS1, but that is dead and buried. It’s doubtful that HS2 will even reach London Euston.
Primrose should realise that HS2 is a building project, not a transport system. We’re six years into it, yet not a jot has been done to tackle the risks that a mechanical engineer would pick out. My list would include the mitigation cost of the selected greenfield route, the reliability of a system planned to send every train to the north of the country up a single track at the rate of 18 an hour, the dependability of the points on the network handling that traffic at 400km/h, and the reliability of the overhead line equipment carrying 300 trains a day, each drawing up to 800A.
When it comes to mitigating the 100dB noise, the civil engineers offer walls and tunnels. I’d like to think a mechanical engineer would have spent the last six years integrating the aerodynamics of the train with line-side wind deflectors.
But then again, if Stephenson or Brunel were asked to design a system for service in 20 years’ time, they’d probably take advantage of developments such as superconductivity, nano-technology and mechatronics.
Don’t expect a happy ending for HS2.
Richard Lloyd, Coventry
Email your views to pe@caspianmedia.com or write to The Editor, PE, Unit G4, Harbour Yard, Chelsea Harbour, London, SW10 0XD. please include your full name and address