Milestone-Proposal talk:Budapest Metroline No.1.
Advocates and reviewers will post their comments below. In addition, any IEEE member can sign in with their ETHW login (different from IEEE Single Sign On) and comment on the milestone proposal's accuracy or completeness as a form of public review.
I'm Mort Hans, your milestone proposal advocate.
I read the draft version when it was first submitted and decided to wait until the final version was officially submitted and found the history and development of the Budapest subway system of great interest.
My primary concern is that the proposal does not adequately support a technological or scientific achievement of the Budapest Metroline No.1 in terms of the electrical technology that went into its design. The proposal emphasis is instead more on the construction of the line from a civil engineering and social benefit view. That it was the first modern subway built on the continent in itself is not adequate. What is needed is how electrical engineering innovation or adaptation of existing electrical devices contributed to it success.
For example, how did it compare with the London Underground in terms of the bogie traction motors built by the Shlick Forgery and Machine Factory, the four rail system vs the Metroline No.1 above ground current collector. What about the electrical power requirements to power the system? Did Siemens and Halske also build the Akacfa Street power plant and was the 300V steam turbine generators innovative compared with the London Underground system or existing tram systems. Were the electric devices made by Siemens and Halske new designs or adaptions of in use by surface trams? In general were the electrical parts of the system adaptions of devices in use on the surface trams?
When you are satisfied with the proposal and are ready to submit it again please review the citation in terms of the milestone summarizing the achievement and its significance. Here's an example of an approved citation: http://ethw.org/Milestones:Alternating-Current_Electrification_of_the_New_York,_New_Haven_%26_Hartford_Railroad,_1907
This was a pioneering venture in mainline railroad electrification. It established single-phase alternating current as a technical and economical alternative to direct current. This concept exerted considerable influence over subsequent systems both in the United States and abroad. The major components of the system were developed by the engineering staffs of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad and the Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company of East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Please keep in mind that the IEEE History Committee will have to approve and recommend your proposal as a milestone. The members have diverse backgrounds but their primary interest will be in the electrical engineering aspects of the achievement. While I personally found the historical and construction aspects of the proposal of much interest their length and detail compared with electrical technology aspects were perhaps more than necessary.
Please keep in mind that my responsibility is to provide guidance on submitting a successful proposal.
Further remarks about the Citation:
Because it is in the English Language, the company name would be better with '&' (ampersand) replacing the German 'und' in Siemens and Halske. The format with & is in common use.
The name of the Schlick company is not translated properly. Forgery has a different meaning! In the name "Schlick-féle Vasöntöde és Gépgyár Részvénytársaság" a better translation of Vasöntöde would be Foundry or Iron Foundry. Since there is a (subsequently formed and unrelated) German company called Schlick, it would be better to make clear that it is a Hungarian company called Schlick which is referred to. It was formed by Ignac Schlick in Buda.
Prof. Dr. Anthony C Davies., Emeritus Professor, King's College London and IEEE Region 8 History Activities Coordinator. 2018 Feb 21st
Re: Advocate Comment -- Kadarpeter (talk) 14:30, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I am going to develop it. I'll return soon, regards
Dear Peter, I look forward to your update. Mort Hans
general remark -- Tonydavies (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
I believe that the Budapest Metro line no 1 does merit a History Milestone award. It is well established as the first electrical underground railway system in the whole of continental Europe, following very soon after the one in London, England. The Hungarian industry development of electrical supply and traction was very advanced with many leading ideas and new inventions at this time, and although I am not personally an expert on the 'heavy electrical engineering' history', it would be surprising if these innovative aspects were not to be found in the facilities of the Metro Line No 1. it is one of a number of electrical-related topics in Hungary which I believe deserve the award of a milestone. I agree with the remarks that the electrical engineering aspects might be given more emphasis in the proposal, the other material is interesting and comprehensive but when the citation is chosen, the electrical aspects should be prominent. Another aspect is that the metro line was refurbished recently to match the historical aspects and appearance, it is more evidently a tourist attraction and having a visible IEEE History Milestone Plaque would also be good for IEEE's reputation.
Prof. Dr. Anthony C Davies., Emeritus Professor, King's College London and IEEE Region 8 History Activities Coordinator. 2018 Feb 12th
Dear Prof. Davies, Thank you for your comments. Perhaps after this milestone is approved some other firsts associated with Hungary might be considered. Mort Hans Milestone Advocate
With your excellent revision of the features section of the milestone proposal and upon receiving the required review comments by two experts I will recommend its consideration for approval by the IEEE History Center Committee. I do suggest that you consider revising the plaque citation to better reflect the several achievements cited in the features section of the proposal. If you can provide me with the email addresses of two experts I will ask them to review the proposal.
Joseph J. Cunningham, an engineering historian and an authority on New York City’s subways and electrical power systems, made the following comments for posting.
1. The citation should reflect the fact that it was the first system predicated on the use of electric power not an adaptation of a steam powered system.
2. The use of the term "cut & cover" should be eliminated unless it can be proven that true cut & cover - that is the use of a temporary street surface above the excavation while work progresses below - was utilized. Otherwise a term such as excavation should be substituted. Although the strict definition of cut & cover has been muddied over time, it described a specific technique in the 1890-1910 (or later) time period, one that should be used when detailing events of the period.
3. Overall I think there should be greater focus on the electrical rather than the civil engineering significance but if civil engineering is to be mentioned it should conform to the usage of the period.
Robert Lobenstein, now retired, the former General Superintendent of the New York City Transit Power Operations made the following comments for posting. -- W2ots (talk) 04:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
The comments below refer to two photos provided by the Siemens Historical Institute that could not be uploaded. They show the original subway car and a supporting car bogie.
"I do love those of the "Budapest-Battleships" The steel frame construction, front to back, ensures these cars will not flex nor be damaged if they hit a horse cart. The bogie shows the original 1800's reverse shackles and suspension springs used in many carriage of the day. I would have liked to see the photo from the other side to examine how the motor and gearing was installed.
I am looking at a couple of IEEE Milestone plaques, (Smaller glass table top variety), and note that earlier plaques had a 60 or fewer word count. While i don't think the cut/cover tunnel construction is a major inclusion, from an electrical engineering standpoint, there should be mention of whatever innovations in generation/transmission and distribution there were at the time."
I recommend that the proposal citation be revised to incorporate the comments of the reviewers, Joseph Cunningham and Robert Lobenstein, to emphasize the electrical engineering aspect of the design and its implementation.
- 1 Advocate Comment -- Museum (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- 2 general remark -- Tonydavies (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- 3 Advocate comment -- W2ots (talk) 18:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- 4 Proposal Comments -- W2ots (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- 5 Robert Lobenstein, now retired, the former General Superintendent of the New York City Transit Power Operations made the following comments for posting. -- W2ots (talk) 04:32, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
- 6 Advocates Comment -- W2ots (talk) 05:05, 21 June 2019 (UTC)