Isambard Kingdom Brunel
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
> While performing a conjuring trick for the amusement of his children in 1843 Brunel accidentally inhaled a half-sovereign coin, which became lodged in his windpipe. A special pair of forceps failed to remove it, as did a machine devised by Brunel to shake it loose. At the suggestion of his father, Brunel was strapped to a board and turned upside-down, and the coin was jerked free.
It feels like the hacker spirit - the enthusiasm for dumb tricks and then having to invent your way out the pickle you have got yourself in.
We shouldn't forget Marc Brunel was also a great engineer and no doubt a very practical man. :-)
;-)
https://youtu.be/QwHnVH9jWmU?si=lFShZQ4WMvRQwiys
The French origins of his father Marc are mentioned very early on.
Slip of the orders of magnitude.
Hard to believe, but true.
Compound interest/inflation - the most powerful force in the universe (see Einstein). For good (interest) and ill (inflation).
All those investment advisors never mention the real interest rate, which is the key factor (and famously hard to measure, after all the Goodhart's Law shenanigans of govt and central banks manipulating RPI/CPI core/not and TIPS/breakevens).
I don't think the real interest rate is that hard to measure. You don't have to pick your local government's favoured measure of inflation, just pick your own.
Eg in the long run you could pick the Big Mac index. Or you could pick some other country's official price level measure and multiply it by the exchange rate with their currency. (In the short run, you have different real price levels between countries, but perhaps they even out in the long run.)
In 1931 mean wages in the UK are reckoned to have been 1s (£0.05) per hour [1].
Currently mean wages in the UK are £617 per week (40hrs) or £15.42 per hour [2].
So a half sov in 1931 was worth 10hrs of work, while today it's worth 12.60hrs of work. Quite interesting that it's value has risen (in real terms) even while it's stopped being a currency (more or less). Perhaps because it's actually useful in electronics now (not so much in 1931).
So gold has had real
[1] https://www.pocketpence.co.uk/wages-1930s-12269131.html [2] https://www.forbes.com/uk/advisor/business/average-uk-salary...
Labor in UK (and wider western world) has lost out compared to gold, due to globalization (net benefit to the world). That is irreversible.
Gold has lost out to tech and speculative risky investments, for now. That is certainly reversible. Watch this space 2024-5.
His father was almost as prolific and spent time in a debtors prison: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Isambard_Brunel
In the UK, if they like you enough, they name a pub after you.
No truer statement. Made me smile to read.
I had never even heard of Telford before my UK visit, although there is a town in Pennsylvania named for him. As always, there always seems to be national gaps in education.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontcysyllte_Aqueduct
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ehX7gKaAL74
Here's another that's somewhat less famous:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chirk_Aqueduct
Telford was before Brunel (Pontcysyllte was completed a year before Brunel was born) and no doubt the latter took inspiration from him. Both were giants of the Industrial Revolution.
Much of the reason had to do with the then prevailing attitude (the Industrial Revolution worldview) which was that they had a more long-term view coupled with pride—'see what we can now do' (often engeering was carried out to the best of its ability and done without shortcomings).
https://www.britainexpress.com/images/attractions/editor/Ove...
One can only guess at his reaction were he to know what was to come. Excitement at the strength of it? Disappointment at its tasteless design? The old Telford bridge makes a lovely footpath these days though.
The Commission for Stopping Further Improvements - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35657436 - April 2023 (139 comments)
Steamships, Part 2: The Further Adventures of Isambard Kingdom Brunel - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34995158 - March 2023 (2 comments)
Isambard Kingdom Brunel – “one of the most ingenious and prolific engineers” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18823787 - Jan 2019 (1 comment)
Isambard Kingdom Brunel - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10577096 - Nov 2015 (17 comments)
Isambard Kingdom Brunel - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7736288 - May 2014 (25 comments)
The Evolution of Tunnel Boring Machines - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37836889 (though that was due to Marc Brunel, Isambard's father).
> If the Commission is to enquire into the conditions “to be observed,” it is to be presumed that they will give the result of their enquiries; or, in other words, that they will lay down, or at least suggest, “rules” and “conditions to be (hereafter) observed” in the construction of bridges, or, in other words, embarrass and shackle the progress of improvement tomorrow by recording and registering as law the prejudices or errors of today.
> Nothing, I believe, has tended more to distinguish advantageously the profession of engineering in England and in America, nothing has conduced more to the great advance made in our profession and to our pre-eminence in the real practical application of the science, than the absence of all règles de l’art—a term which I fear is now going to be translated into English by the words “conditions to be observed.” No man, however bold or however high he may stand in his profession, can resist the benumbing effect of rules laid down by authority. Occupied as leading men are, they could not afford the time, or trouble, or responsibility of constantly fighting against them—they would be compelled to abandon all idea of improving upon them; while incompetent men might commit the grossest blunder provided they followed the rules. For, in the simplest branch of construction, rules may be followed literally without any security as to the result.
Sadly many projects that could become those great icons in the future now get killed by (often the same) people complaining about wasting money and not wanting it built near them.
I wonder how those projects were viewed when proposed and being built and what we can learn about our current approach in the UK.
I often think people feel the UK is “done” and we shouldn’t strive to built new things.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001gjcm
Edit: And this is a great article on the reasons why large infrastructure projects in the UK are far too expensive: https://www.samdumitriu.com/p/britains-infrastructure-is-too... I bet if we could bring them in on budget people would get behind them much more.
I know when the Olympics was in Weymouth and Portland, someone knew a contractor who was doing it, and they were able to charge 3x their normal rate as long as it was guaranteed to be on time. They made a fortune. In addition, a local road building project near me (which is on the road between London and Weymouth) was pushed through to provide a better route - despite it being massively expensive and making a terrible long-term mess of what was a bad junction that needed a flyover, not the awful hamburger junction solution that the local area is now saddled with that is always on the traffic reports.
Do you mean the Canford Bottom Roundabout [1] by any chance? :)
I'd say the problem is cronyism and corruption with our politicians. They managed to splash £76million on a useless "NHS" Covid App (not NHS) and any solution to a problem is just seen as a way of funnelling public money into the pockets of the politicians' friends and family (c.f. Rishi Sunak's granting of new oil exploration licenses and his wife's family's investments).
I think people do want it, but the government is making bad picks. HS2 is a good example. Spending that much while not maintaining the (unreliable ) existing lines is pointless.
I don't believe there ever was a solid business case for HS2, but Adonis gave it the green light and no-one since was brave enough to pull the plug.
"The project itself goes back to 1982, when a group of managers from the nationalised British Rail visited the new TGV railway in France. They returned boggle-eyed at the sight of a train racing at 270kmph (150mph) down its own track, crossing France, from Paris to Lyon, in two hours. Among the visitors was a 35-year-old civil engineer, Jim Steer. He was captivated by speed and, as he told me recently, dismayed by the conviction of his colleagues that “in Britain we would never be allowed to do it”. As with Concorde, Steer understood that the idea of speed could arouse politicians and open purse strings to projects that might otherwise get nowhere. It was speed that had persuaded such prestige-sensitive governments as Japan and France to build new railways.
Steer was to be one of three men – the others were a rail-obsessed peer and a chancellor of the exchequer – who kept the dream of high-speed rail alive over the next three decades. Educated at Imperial College London, he trained at the contractors Freeman Fox, but in 1978 he turned freelance as a transport consultant, setting up his own firm: Steer Davies Gleave. A natural buccaneer, he proved adept at winning consultancy contracts anywhere there was a glimmer of interest in fast trains. “Jim was like a terrier,” a contemporary told me. “His name popped up at the foot of reports, inquiries and surveys, wherever the words high-speed rail occurred.”"
"It is the most extravagant infrastructure project in British history – but nobody can say why we need it. How did HS2 ever get so far?" https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/07/hs2-the-zomb...
"The controversial campaign to build a high-speed rail line between London and Birmingham was dealt a blow on Tuesday when an independent report questioned the business case for the £32bn scheme." https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jun/21/business-case-hs2...
"In 2010, when a high-speed rail line from London to the north – HS2 – was proposed by the outgoing Labour government, I wrote an article arguing that the numbers didn’t add up. The environmental benefits had been inflated by a series of blatant accounting tricks and concocted figures. What the government called the “business case” for the scheme was in fact a cost-benefit analysis, in which the supposed economic benefits had been amplified by outright assaults on common sense. The case for HS2 always was a baggage train of bullshit." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/28/hs2-fi...
Amazing to think that, adjusted for inflation from 1984 pounds, it cost less to build than ten miles of track on HS2 (current estimate £307m per mile).
The person who "sponsored" Brunel on that list was Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear fame, who was given an hour on the BBC to argue his case (other persons of note were given time to argue in favor of their own choices). You can find his video here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwHnVH9jWmU
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifton_Suspension_Bridge#Oper...
Well, fancy that!
First episode is about the SS Great Eastern, an iron ship that was the largest ship built at the time of her launch, designed by Brunel. [2]
I’d highly recommended the series which features episodes on the construction of the Panama Canal, Transcontinental railway and Hoover Dam.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Wonders_of_the_Industr...
Edit: This is not a documentary but a docu-drama reenactment.
As with all great civil engineering projects, the assessment of the cost was over-optimistic. The Act authorising the construction, passed in 1835, allowed for pounds 3.3m. The total cost when it opened in June 1841 turned out to be pounds 6.15m.
Despite cost runovers, healthy dividends were paid in these early days. Before the depression of the late 1840s, the company was paying 8 per cent per annum which, at a time of no inflation and low interest rates, was very satisfactory. Even after the economy recovered, according to E T MacDermot, author of the History of the Great Western Railway, 'three-quarters of a century were destined to pass before the Company again paid 8 per cent'. The deterioration of the economy led to a cut in dividends to 7 per cent per annum, then to 6 per cent. By August 1849, dividends were down to 4 per cent, where they remained until they fell to 3 per cent in the mid-1850s.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/lessons-of-history-an-...
Brunel himself made some money but quite a modest amount compared to what you might expect given his fame.
At the time of his death in 1859, Brunel is estimated to have been worth about £8 million in today’s money. It’s not a bad sum but for a someone of his profile, £8 million is a very modest amount.
https://historylists.org/people/list-of-10-famous-britons-an...
Not that I think engineers should strive to make a lot of money. But its interesting to know that one of the most famous engineers in history didn't generate a lot of cash.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Bridges,_London
which has a road over a canal over a railway line.
So much of a society is designed by engineers - all the important parts really - it seems probable that there are a lot of amazing people who the history books just don't record. The list of great engineering names is short vs. the list of great engineering marvels. Similarly to how is is easy enough to find histories of people who caused massive great wars (Alexander the so-called Great springs to mind) but histories of places that had centuries of prosperity tend to not penetrate the public consciousness. It is all too complex and there are usually greasy capitalists involved instead of respectable axe-murdering generals.
Anyway, thanks Isambard for representing something important in the history books.
The solution is simply explained if you take a piece of paper, draw some "brickwork" lines on it it, bend it into an arch, then twist it so that the arch and the thing it is crossing are at an angle.
You'll see how the lines of bricks are angled vertically instead of being straight horizontal. That is exactly how they are at Moulsford.
I dunno what NIMBYs would have been in a position to object to his bridges, though.
The landowner, incidentally, had purchased the land as an act of retaliation against the railway, feeling slighted after having previously sold land in Zandvoort (near Haarlem) to the railway.
Unofficial town motto: "It's not and island and its not burnt!" :-)
It's 2.4 km long which puts it at about $200 million GBP / km.
The East Span of the Bay Bridge cost 6.5 billion USD in 2013 which would be 8.5 billion USD today or just shy of 7 billion GBP. It is 3.5 km long which puts it at $2 billion GBP / km.
It appears that the over-engineering yielded a cheaper result per kilometre and that more expensive projects will quite readily be funded, up to 10x higher.
It's estimated 78 people died constructing the forth bridge which would be unacceptable these days
So there is a significant additional cost, however only one person was killed building it vs 73 for the forth bridge. It was also (of course) bitterly opposed by the green party, the friends of the earth, nimbies etc but thankfully these usual suspects were defeated.
You can't easily compare different bridges (especially on different continents!) with the different terrain. I assume the queensferry crossing is on the "3rd best" location to build a bridge on that part of the Forth, the Forth Bridge will have been able to choose the easiest route.
The queensferry crossing is regarded as quite well managed when it comes to costs: https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/sections/news/queensferry...
Veering slightly offtopic now, but I don't know we can confidently say it yielded a "cheaper" result too - maintenance over the years has been pretty expensive, since the bridge needed to be constantly coated with special paint to prevent corrosion. This has found its way into Scots language as a popular simile for a neverending task: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/like_painting_the_Forth_Bridg...
* The Green Book is how the government appraises public projects. It has often been accused of having a miserly view on the benefits of infrastructure, leading to regional disparities in spending.
Worthwhile noting that back then the country was significantly less full of people to mount objections. e.g. Paddington was built where it is because that was the edge of the city at the time. Similarly Bristol Temple Meads was built in a meadow area outside the city. The were no major roads unless built by Romans.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=21QqXumEWFU&pp=ygUcaXNhbWJhcmQ...
The section from Exeter to Newton (now Newton Abbot) was completed on this principle, and trains ran at approximately 68 miles per hour (109 km/h).[59] Pumping stations with distinctive square chimneys were sited at two-mile intervals.
Thats amazing, but I guess it kindof sucked
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/croydon-experimental-at...
There's a famous example of a large rodless cylinder application - the launch system for the V-1 "buzz bomb" of WWII. It didn't have enough engine power to take off without help, so it was launched from a ramp, propelled by a piston in a tube much like the atmospheric railways. Power came from steam, created by the reaction of hydrogen peroxide and potassium permanganate, a very volatile combination. The V-1 itself just ran on low-octane gasoline.
During WWII, some V-1 buzz bombs crashed in England without detonating, and were analyzed and duplicated in the US, as the "Loon". But the Allies didn't have access to a launch ramp (those being in enemy territory at the time) so they didn't know how the launch system worked. Amusingly, that was a good thing. A new launch system had to be invented. The result was a solid fuel booster for rocket-assisted takeoff. This allowed a much more effective launch setup, with a short takeoff rail instead of a huge fixed concrete ramp clearly visible from the air.
Aircraft carrier steam catapults are rodless piston steam systems. Same principle.[2] Some of the same headaches.
[1] https://www.parker.com/content/dam/Parker-com/Literature/Lit...
[2] https://navalmarinearchive.com/research/ims/steam_cat_2.jpg
It's available on the high seas if you go looking.
But I can't tell if it more or less fun to try to recognize which article inspired the post. In this case, I imagine it's the TBM post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37836889), which has a link to Brunel in the first fifth of the article.
It happens a lot on HN...
Follow-up links are great of course! but they belong in the comments, not the submission feed.