What happened to Brooklands?

Think about it – the site has evolved over the last 100 years, and so much history had already been “lost” as a result of the site’s natural “evolution” by the time the site was redeveloped in the 90’s that it didn’t reflect any particular period in it’s history anyway. Surely the museum as it currently stands is just another stage of evolution in the site’s history, but one that does try to reflect on the site’s past in all it’s aspects?

Very well said Paul.

And one of the challenges faced by all such museums is to explain that evolving history. I’ve seen it done well and I’ve seen it done very badly (at a Roman archeological site).

Have been watching this thread, and simply cannot believe some of the attitudes expressed!

I lived in Woking 1969 – 1987, so grew up with “Vickers” (as it was known locally) almost on my doorstep. I frequently travelled past the site when the old Vickers plant was still standing. In the late 70’s I worked just outside Brooklands banking, and we had a second site located inside the circuit, and most days I had to drive through one of the entrance gates cut into the banked section on Oyster Lane (the road that runs on the western side of the circuit) I think that gate still exists as the smaller “back entrance” into the retail park area?

In the late 70’s most of the site, and most of the banked track, was still intact. The old Vickers/BAC/BAe site ont he Eastern side still stod,a dn there was one (or two?) large more modrn hangars on the western side of the runway. A helicopter charter firm (name escapes me) still operated from the northern end of the runway close to the railway line. Sometime in the late 70’s the Brooklands society held an open day, a few aircraft flew in, and a number of old cars ran on the members banking section of the circuit. The main factory was empty by then. No real museum to visit, no Concorde, no Loch Ness Wellington, just an “ex-factory” site and a bunch of Brroklands enthusiasts. A few years later the developers moved in big-time and the place started to change.

The killer blow for many locals was when the Vickers fabrication and assembly hangars and the old office blocks on the old main entrance were destroyed almost overnight – the old “Brooklands” was gone forever. Houses appeared towards the southern end of the field (on the well established flood plain – the powers that be never seem to learn, despite well documented history of flooding), the retail park sprang up, more of the banking was lost to widen entrance roads, and the modern office blocks arrived. Roads were laid across the site etc. Brooklands was all but gone for good. But, someone had the foresight to work with the developers/owners, and the museum started to blossom.

I’ve been to the museum many times since, and seen it grow. Yes, there are many (unsightly) modern buildings very close to the museum site, but take a walk round the banking under the re-instated members bridge, climb up the test hill, or stand and face the old clubhouse, and the place still reeks of atmosphere. Sure, I’d rather have the whole outer circuit intact, the runway and Campbell circuit restored, and none of the modern business units there, but realistically it was never going to happen that way.

As has been said earlier, given the value of real estate in the area over the last thirty years, the fact that ANY of the old site has survived untouched is miraculous, and beyond any sort of economic sense. How many of us would allocate a chunk of potential revenue-generating land to a non-profitable cause (even despite earning possible tax breaks for so doing)? So, rather than knock the current owners of the site, why can’t more people simply thank them for not bulldozing the whole site!

The team running Brooklands do a bl**dy good job in my opinion, I’m sure we’d all prefer to have racing cars from the 30’s thundering around the whole banked circuit once a month or so, with the airfield preserved and in regualr use – but what point in time shoudl it reflect? The pioneering days pre 1910, when A.V Roe and T.O.M Sopwith were making first hops? When the Brooklands Flying school was in its infancy pre WW1? When Vickers were building Vimys at the end of WW1? How about early 30’s with a Moth-equpped flying school? Or perhaps a snapshot of the late 30’s and 40’s when Wellingtons and Hurricanes were being test flown? Maybe late 50s and ealry sixties with Valiants, Viscounts and Vanguards? Or perhaps in the 60’s or 70’s when BAC were building chunks of 1-11s and Concordes there?

Think about it – the site has evolved over the last 100 years, and so much history had already been “lost” as a result of the site’s natural “evolution” by the time the site was redeveloped in the 90’s that it didn’t reflect any particular period in it’s history anyway. Surely the museum as it currently stands is just another stage of evolution in the site’s history, but one that does try to reflect on the site’s past in all it’s aspects?

Be thankful any of Brooklands is left for us to visit – it could so easily have gone the way of Hatfield, and have been buried under more offices and houses. Stop knocking the sites current owners, and maybe consider praising them instead. 😡

(oops, sorry, rant over….:o )

Britain did ‘dominate’ (certainly led) the world in the era of the technological peak – it was called the Industrial Revolution.

Technological peak? I’m surprised that you think technology is going to be of less importance in the future. 😀

And how useful is doing so through rose-tinted spectacles, anyway? British industry died on it’s feet because it couldn’t compete in a world market – the car, motorbike, aviation and other industries committed suicide with arrogance, incompetence, and products that didn’t do the job.

The politicians helped, but ‘British engineering’ became a byword in the Commonwealth, US and other markets for ‘badly designed’ by British engineers’ work, not political interference.

I hope my spectacles aren’t too rose-tinted.

Engineering is a very complex business and success relies heavily on other factors other than the fundamental ability of the engineers who actually design the product.

I’d agree that British industry has been guilty of all that you mention but so have the industries of other nations however their industry seems to survive whereas British industry does not.

As has been suggested ‘British Engineering’ and British engineers are still in demand and do attract considerable investment but unfortunately ‘British Engineering’ does not seem to get the recognition it (still) deserves from British government.

Whenever it is mentioned it is always said to be in ‘decline’ however what politicians mean is that the number of jobs in engineering is in decline but productivity still remains (relatively) high. In other industries this would be called efficiency.

Anyway back on topic.

I’d like to point out that I have no criticism of Brooklands as a museum and no criticism of Mercedes-Benz for purchasing their site.

The construction of the ‘large smoked glass building’ (which I either haven’t seen or don’t remember seeing) may be unfortunate but Mercedes-Benz are running a business not a charity and by some accounts they have at least preserved some of the existing track which I’m not sure was so safe in the hands of the local (or national) government.

It has been a number of years since I have visited the (aviation) museum and I was most impressed by what I saw. The Loch Ness Wellington has set a benchmark for the recovery of a genuine combat veteran aircraft, its display in a highly appropriate location and its sympathetic ‘restoration’.

The huge undertaking to recover a Concorde to a site where some of the design work was done also does the museum great credit.

A vision for the future?

‘Large smoked glass buildings’ and ‘Gallahers ghastly building’ could be swept away just as easily as banked track (if not easier) and since the whole of Brooklands was constructed in less than a year without the benefit of a fleet of British built, British owned JCBs I’m sure it would be possible to recreate the whole track. I’m sure Mercedes-Benz would not object if a plan could be formulated that would benefit all interested parties (and they were not expected to foot the entire bill).

It would be all too easy (and very British) to dismiss this as a pipe-dream but I’m glad that some other posters have used the word ‘vision’ as it’s not often heard these days in this country.

James I am listening, the moderator said that this is not the place for a discusson on our motoring heritage, and he is right, much as I’d love to argue with you and all the other experts, I do feel abliged to keep within the historic aviation frame work; really I should have known better, but was swept along on a strong nationalistic wave.

Stuart,
You don’t seem to be listening to what others have said, rather than responding to your own views’ of others’ ideas. There’s also no call to be personally offensive, thanks.

With regard to the Japanese restriction on imports post war I thought that was common knowledge; all I need to do is remember which book to quote …

So what? I was pointing out that restrictive trade practices were also employed by Britain, which was the point made – and you ignored. For those that wish to learn a glance at the Wikipedia entry on the disgraceful DH-86 is illuminating. Feel free to attack Wikipedia – the facts are all true, and it’s an indictment of the press that DH rarely are called to account for a terrible aircraft.

The japanese started out making copies (no honestly) of the likes of BSA a10’s thats how far they were ahead,

On forum theme, the history of copying has a fine tradition in aviation – the Bristol Boxkite, Britain’s ‘first mass produced aircraft’ was a copy of the Maurice Farman design. Where you start from doesn’t matter – it’s what you do with your trade advantage and copied item that does. The Japanese (note the capital – it’s polite) left the originators of what they copied well behind, as Bristol did.

and their early bikes were crap ; having had loads, I can confirm that the big multis were very heavy, and that together with poor frames, and the legendary Japanese dunrop tyres,the handling was abismal;the fact that they didn’t leak as much oil as British pre unit (you know what a pre unit is, obviously) isn’t a particularily good yard stick to measure the quality of engineering ;

The yardstick is the fact that people wouldn’t buy British bikes (through the 70s and 80s to be specific) because they were rubbish.

I’m told the packard merlin was more oil tight than a British one, but it wasn’t any better, and they never designed it.

What a resentful and inaccurate remark. Packard engineered the essentially hand-built Merlin into an engine that was suitable for mass production; something that no British company had properly achieved. Without Parckard’s mass production of Merlins…

And American aero engine design. No, they didn’t design the Merlin, or the Sabre or Taurus, or Perigrine or Exe. All those round ones that were used to replace British round ones that weren’t very good.

People bought the Japanese bikes because of their styling, the bright metalic colours, and reliability that solid state ignition could offer, and ofcourse the price.

Of course. The pretty colours. It’s hardly worth comment. :rolleyes:

With regard to the British motor car, I think to pick one car i.e the MG and hold that up for scrutiny against the might of the American car industry is a bit lame;

Helloooo. I said, I OWNED an MG, and it was not competitive with other sports cars from elsewhere, such as Japan, America and even Scandinavia. Talked to any Americans about ‘the mighty American car industry’? Obviously not. Their winge is exactly the same as yours, but you’re too busy moaning to notice. It’s a world market out there. The MGF’s done well, but the wing mirrors did rather fall off a lot. The MGB was a good car in the 60s, it was the British car industry, workers and leaders that allowed it to stay in production until the 80s (madness) while introducing the TR-7. I don’t think anyone could have not out-competed the British car and bike industry unless they tied their own shoelaces together. Even he Italians did better, a country with a much more sensible work ethc, and FIAT and Farrari.

how about crossflow Rileys circa 1929, Bentleys, jaguars,Astons the Mini; anyone remember that classic piece of motorport they always show on the tv with 2 minis racing a Ford Mustang, yes the mustang was quicker on the straights but on the corners…apparently thats why they have crossroads in the US rather than roundabouts.

Sea Hawk’s made the point a lot better than I can. Incidentally, the designers of the Mini was an ‘asylum seeker’ in today’s prejudicial terminology. The days of people being welcome to Britain to enrich the country with their skills seem to be over.

James, has it never occurred to you, that some of us patriotic enough to stay in this country, might not be that impressed by the way it is evolving, but rather than join the “rats leaving a sinking ship”, would seek to change its direction.

Charming, and you are out of order and incorrect. One – patriotism is the first refuge of a scoundrel. Two – It would be odd if I were ‘patriotic’ about Britain as I’m fourth generation Australian citizen. Three – Britain’s had my tax when I lived there – my dues are paid. Four – I’ve worked in the UK heritage industry, running an adult education centre in a museum, funded by the heritage lottery – my contributory dues, to heritage and education in the UK are also paid. Five – I don’t regard Britain as ‘a sinking ship’ but as an ex-empire with some inhabitants living in a whiney fool’s paradise. As I said at the beginning, other ex-empires have come to terms with their role in the world, but that whooshed over your head as well, it seems. Rats can’t keep a ship afloat, and I’d appreciate an apology for calling me one, thanks.

My reasons for leaving the UK are none of your business; however attitudes like yours was one of the reasons. Like many people today, I work in a munti-national environment; running a tri-national publishing company with one foot (and some profits) firmly in the UK; writing for a UK magazine, and so forth. It’s a multi-national world. It’s certainly not an even playing field, but if you can’t compete (and Britain can – Brooklands is a world class heritage site and museum, and BAe is a fine arms dealer) then find something else to do, or get the rules changed. Don’t winge – no-one cares. Airbus and Boeing exist because they come back from some hard knocks; not that they’ve had it easy. (Partly) in Canada, Bombardier are a fine example of what can be done in aerospace by a company that tries; here, in Australia, we can lament the missed opportunities, but we also are proud of Gippsland Aeronautics small business and international success.

The British govt has systematically destroyed either by direct action,or apathy, manufacturing, and farming in the UK;…

Problems that Canada, New Zealand, France, Australia, and so forth have also faced, and deal with or not. You aren’t alone, except expecting divine intervention, or special treatment. As to farming, I’m sorry, try farming in a country with a tough climate. British farmers have an uphill battle, I know, and legislations’ tough; but it really isn’t ‘easy’ elsewhere. I was pleased to buy locally when in the UK, but again, get good or get out.

What’s wrong with Brooklands? Nothing. It’s just had a fine centenary show (see here) and something to be proud of rather than wasting any more time on resentful, small minded xenophobic bilge, I’m going to enjoy some nice green cars. 😉

Regards,

With regard to the British motor car, I think to pick one car i.e the MG and hold that up for scrutiny against the might of the American car industry is a bit lame; how about crossflow Rileys circa 1929, Bentleys, jaguars,Astons the Mini; anyone remember that classic piece of motorport they always show on the tv with 2 minis racing a Ford Mustang, yes the mustang was quicker on the straights but on the corners…apparently thats why they have crossroads in the US rather than roundabouts.

A rather odd mix of cars, lets look at these and thier wonderful testament to the quality of British engineering:

The WO Bentleys were magnificent machines with a great Le Mans record but were crude tools with an agricultural chassis and won through massive engines, gross over-engineering (the track was really rough then), vastly superior organisation and some arcane rules. Otherwise they were so relevant that the firm went bust in 1931, even with Woolf Barnato bankrolling it so that he could win Le Mans, after a massive twelve years of trading. After RR took over the Derby Bentleys were nothing to write home about, as for the badge engineered RRs…. now at least the firm is building half decent cars again – designed by VW and using many VW parts.

Jaguars were built down to a price and had shocking build quality and reliability – until Ford took them over and sorted it out. Oh and that wonderful 150mph icon the E-Type – only achieved by issuing a car to Autocar (who were equally deceitful) that was fitted with a C-Type head, bigger rear (racing) tyres, aluminium panels and perspex side windows – try getting 140mph out of a standard 3.8 E-Type. We won’t even talk about body rot.

Aston Martins – when they opened the M1 the DB4s ran their main bearings when run consistently at speeds of over 100mph. Are more modern ones better – the DB7 was an appallingly built car that is notorious for its unreliability. Again it has taken acquistion by Ford to sort the quality out -largely by going to their European parts bin. Just what great innovation has AM ever given the world of motoring?

The Mini – yes a wonderful design icon and a real trend setter, but with some appalling detail design and dreadful build quailty. I should know about this we had one as family car from new in 1961 until it fell apart in 1974 (and our only car until supplanted by a Peugeot 504 in 1973) – my late father used to spend very many weekends repairing its continuous niggling faults, and until he put in a lot of his own electrics in a heavy downpour the electrics would get wet and the engine would die. Then of course there are the economic aspects – as if badly building a design that was never properly developed and insufficiently tested by a bolshy workforce was not enough BMC were so incompetent that they had no idea what the car cost to build and sold it at a loss… is there anything that is symptomatic of British industry?

Trying to say that British cars are better than US cars is a bit like saying that it is better to have your hand chopped off than your head – I agree they are, but both are woefully short of the best world standard – the competition was and is with the rest of Europe and the the Far East. Are you really saying that one would have been sensible to have bought an Austin Allegro rather than a VW Golf (amazingly in the UK more people did, which says a lot as well)?

If one looks at a selection of cars that are more relevant to the sucess and failure of a nation’s car industry, rather than a few highly priced exotics, what about the Morris Ital, the Austin Maestro, the Ford Poplar, the Standard 8, the Vauxhall Victor, the Austin Atlantic, and the Austin Cambridge/Morris Oxford as testament to the “World leading” nature of the industry. Yes other European nations had their lemons (e.g. 50’s and 60’s Opels and Simcas) but they had more properly developed, competently built and priced world leading designs to compensate.

Going back to the thread Mercedes have history at Brooklands and have every right to be there, I find the xenophobia that has been expressed on this subject somewhat offensive. Even my 83 year old father-in-law, who was a navigator in Liberators during the war would get hot under the collar at such remarks.

If may be allowed a controversial thought (for this forum) Brooklands is far more important as a racing circuit than it is as an aircraft manufacturing site – as an aviation centre it was one of many, but as a racing circuit it was a unique facility in Britain (until Donnington?) with a unique approach. As such it also tells an important lessons to future generations. Firstly of the of the dangers of protectionism – races were run to an absurd handicapping system that enabled British cars to be competitive and penalised the otherwise much faster Bugattis, Alfas, Maseratis, Delages, etc, particularly once the Campbell Circuit opened (and also encouraged cheating – read Leo Villers on Malcolm Campbell for example). This fools paradise kept British racing car design behind for years. Secondly, ‘the right crowd and no crowding’ is an example of how we have moved on as a society and a lesson in the attidute of mind that allowed our lead in the Industrial Revolution to be squandered.

I must say that I admire the Brooklands Museum – I would very strongly recommend it as a day out for anyone with even a vague interest in cars or aircraft – even my aged mother thoroughly enjoyed it. However, I do feel that the post war concrete aviation buildings adjacent to the Finishing Straight are utterly ghastly and are a negative asset.

Since the thread is Brooklands, can I take this sneaky opportunity to mention that the Brooklands aero/auto/bike jumble is on Sun 15 July 2007. Why not come along and support the museum by doing so? Andy Saunders

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I’ve just checked my diary and I’m working all day Saturday and all day Sunday 🙁

…although I’m sure I’m owed some holiday 😀

Hello

Leaving the museum aside for a second, I would like to question how the local council allowed a Mercedes car dealership to build the monstrosity that is, the a large smoked glass building, right in the middle of it all! Wherever you go on the site, and even if the banking is ever fully restored, there is this great big ugly lump of smoked glass and steel building, that is totally out of keeping with its surroundings, visible from everywhere on the site.

And I ask you, what does Mercedes have to do with the home of British aviation and Motorsport. It would be just like Lotus setting up a dealership at Kitty hawk, or in the middle of the Nurburg ring??

As far as the museum goes. Every museum has a limited amount of staff and funding. A large portion of the Brooklands museum is well laid out, well presented, and cares for its exhibits to a good degree. Remember, the jumble of buildings on its site are all original, and have evolved as part of a race track and factory complex. These are not designed to look pretty, certainly from the 40’s onwards. I’m sure the museum tries every year to improve its facilities, but with some of the factory buildings and hangar, it is a constant battle to preserve these, as well as the exhibits. Some of the more recent buildings do need some tlc, but I don’t see any exhibits suffering, and they are certainly well cared for. You are correct, the ongoing significance of this site is nationally important to us.

I suggest that anyone concerned about the preservation of UK aviation/motorsport should go and lend their support directly (either financial of physical) to your local museum, as it is only through hands-on efforts that these places can be maintained.

Local councils care not one jot for our engineering heritage, be it aviation or otherwise-if there is a piece of land that they can sell for ‘developement’ megabucks, they will fall over themselves to get rid of it to the highest bidder 😡

Brooklands….aerojumble etc!

Since the thread is Brooklands, can I take this sneaky opportunity to mention that the Brooklands aero/auto/bike jumble is on Sun 15 July 2007. Why not come along and support the museum by doing so? Andy Saunders

Sneaky yes but last no,you want to take issue with some of what is said, but you don’t want it to continue (here); unfortunately Brooklands is many things to many people, and most of which has been commented on has little bearing on “historic aviation”,so you may well be right to move it.

With my ‘Poster’ hat on can I say that blaming the government, rather than the emergent economies for the demise of British manufacturing is palpable nonsense.

With my ‘Moderator’ hat on can I plead for this thread to at least try and stay somewhere near Brooklands? The Split thread facility doesn’t work currently, so if I have to move it to ‘General’ it all goes.

Anybody who cares to open a similar topic thread on General where the interesting discussion can continue will get my vote of thanks.

Moggy
Moderator

And I apologise if this looks like a sneaky way of trying to get the last word. 🙂

With regard to the Japanese restriction on imports post war I thought that was common knowledge; all I need to do is remember which book to quote …

The japanese started out making copies (no honestly) of the likes of BSA a10’s thats how far they were ahead, and their early bikes were crap ; having had loads, I can confirm that the big multis were very heavy, and that together with poor frames, and the legendary Japanese dunrop tyres,the handling was abismal;the fact that they didn’t leak as much oil as British pre unit (you know what a pre unit is, obviously) isn’t a particularily good yard stick to measure the quality of engineering ; I’m told the packard merlin was more oil tight than a British one, but it wasn’t any better, and they never designed it.

People bought the Japanese bikes because of their styling, the bright metalic colours, and reliability that solid state ignition could offer, and ofcourse the price.

With regard to the British motor car, I think to pick one car i.e the MG and hold that up for scrutiny against the might of the American car industry is a bit lame; how about crossflow Rileys circa 1929, Bentleys, jaguars,Astons the Mini; anyone remember that classic piece of motorport they always show on the tv with 2 minis racing a Ford Mustang, yes the mustang was quicker on the straights but on the corners…apparently thats why they have crossroads in the US rather than roundabouts.

James, has it never occurred to you, that some of us patriotic enough to stay in this country, might not be that impressed by the way it is evolving, but rather than join the “rats leaving a sinking ship”, would seek to change its direction.

The British govt has systematically destroyed either by direct action,or apathy, manufacturing, and farming in the UK; ask yourself ,why are there so many japanese car manufactures in the UK? because as a UK firm they get around import tarrifs, how can it be cheaper to bring milk from france by road to the UK ,than to buy from the farm down the road?, it isn’t, but the supermarkets don’t like the idea that British farmers have a monopoly (because the super markets want that), and what are the British govt doing? ,nothing.

And Ian,
dare I say cramped?–well compared with the Bonanza.

A.

Some would argue that if we only bought British in this country,and the industry had no competition, that we would end up driving and flying the equivilent of trabbands, wartburgs and antinov biplanes, however during the 20’s,30’s,40’s and 50’s our trains planes and automobiles were the best in the world

Please give examples…?
I’m awaiting that with baited breath.

Although it pains me to say it, I always use the example of Auster in the 50’s. At the time when Beech had developed the Bonanza, Cessna the 150, 170 and 172 powered by modern engines, Auster were still turning out designs that had their origins pre-war, covered in fabric by and large with engines (I think – tell me if I’m wrong) that had their origins in WW1 V8s. Then of course there was the Beagle Airedale, all 43 of them……………….

Oh and James.
Imperial Airways pilots and navs who were given guided tours of those Lockheeds were told to make no comment to the media or publicly
about the aircraft or the engineering they had seen on pain of disciplinary action being taken.

I think the reason was that the flagship aeroplane of IA at the time was the HP42.

I always smile about the DH88 Comet too.
An aircraft which did indeed win, but with more nasty characteristics than one could shake a stick at and carrying two people in a degree of discomfort and the DC-2 which came second (and not by much) after carrying passengers some of the way in a degree of comfort.
If anything illustrates a point, I always feel this is the one.

A.

What the man from Beds said. Having enjoyed driving an old MG, it’s hardly competative with an American, Japanese or even Scandinavian make.

I seem to remember that the Japanese motor industry gained a foot hold because, they were allowed to set up a restrictive trade through import tarrifs, as a way of getting them “back on their feet”, we weren’t so lucky, and are suffering a similar fate being part of the EU.

Better to believe that than look at the quality issue. Sauce. 😉 Geese and ganders. The Empire protection scheme is one reason why Britain was able to sell marginally airworthy wooden aircraft with fixed undercarriages (DH-86 Express) to Australia rather than Australia being able to buy all metal retractable undercarriage aircraft from America (DC-2). The first British Airways was set up with Lockeed L.10 Electras to run Royal Mail to Scandinavia, in the words of a 1938 British publication (and I quote) “…because British industry hadn’t produced a suitable type.”

Britain’s chance of competing with the other trading Blocs relies on the EU; anyone thinking the UK can go it alone is living in a fool’s paradise.

What successive governments have done to Britains industry is scandelous and wouldn’t be allowed to happen anywhere else in the world;…

Where have you been? The Government damage to Canada’s aviation industry (Jetliner, Avro Arrow, anyone?) is one, and I can’t see which were worse in Australia – CAC and DAP/GAF mis-management or Australia’s successive government’s screwing it up. The US aero industry only looks good from, for instance, Britain. Talk to people within it, you’ll see it’s also had more problems than most americanophobes realise – there was enough good product there, and tough guys to make it work, that was the difference. The American politicians pork-barrel in ways that make the British self interest seem benign.

The problem doesn’t lie with Mercedes, but with the British govt, in allowing them to A, purchase the site, and B, allow the developement.

I’m not even going to bother with the xenophobic element there – I’ll just ask which equivalent British company would be the alternative.

Interesting discussion!

Oh and the authorities at Brooklands were so far sighted and interested in engineering and aviation that they evicted Edwin Alliott Verdon Roe at least once.

Says a lot for the rot which had set in (even at that early stage) and the class-ism which prevailed at Brooklands and has hamstrung British industry for generations.

A very interesting excerpt from the Brooklands Society website:

Brooklands was the brainchild of a wealthy landowner, Hugh Fortesque Locke-King who decided during a European tour in 1906 that Britain had to have its own motor testing track if its fledgling car industry was to develop and prosper in competition with the Europeans.

In Europe, motor racing on public roads had been commonplace since before the turn of the century but in Britain it was actively discouraged. In 1906 Hugh Locke-King had attended both the Italian Targa Florio and the French Grand Prix, both run on public roads with not a single British car to be seen.

British car makers obviously had no chance at all of competing in Europe on equal terms and it was obvious to Hugh Locke-King that an English off-road track and testing ground was sorely needed.

For nine months over seven hundred men worked almost around the clock for seven days a week, the only breaks being on Saturday and Sunday nights.

The river Wey was diverted, smallholders were re-housed, thirty acres of woodland were felled and 350,000 cubic yards of earth were moved. Seven miles of rail track was laid and 200,000 tons of gravel and cement were brought in and cast to become the race track.

As well as the outer circuit, a finishing straight ran from the reverse curve section known as the fork to the member’s banking making the overall track length 3.25 miles (5.23 km) of which two miles were level, the remainder being banked.

Because the centre of the site was swampy it had to be built up by five feet to form the finishing straight for a kilometre and a further acre also raised to the same height to form the site for the clubhouse, the paddock and the surrounding sheds.

http://www.brooklands.org.uk/stories/Stories%20archive/STORY1.HTM

Unfortunately I haven’t time for any more comment at present.

I seem to remember that the Japanese motor industry gained a foot hold because, they were allowed to set up a restrictive trade through import tarrifs, as a way of getting them “back on their feet”, we weren’t so lucky, and are suffering a similar fate being part of the EU.

No they produced better products which worked.
Motorbikes which didn’t leak oil and started–they even had electric starters and cars that didn’t leak water inwards in the Winter and would run for 100,000 miles without throwing all sorts of fluids out underneath!
People liked them and bought them and still do.
Something the British motor industry kidded itself the punters didn’t want–what reliabilty???–s*d that when I can spend a January afternoon stuck under a car on the roadside.

Some would argue that if we only bought British in this country,and the industry had no competition, that we would end up driving and flying the equivilent of trabbands, wartburgs and antinov biplanes, however during the 20’s,30’s,40’s and 50’s our trains planes and automobiles were the best in the world.

Please give examples…?
I’m awaiting that with baited breath.

The problem doesn’t lie with Mercedes, but with the British govt, in allowing them to A, purchase the site, and B, allow the developement.

So you think the Government was at fault???

I’ll give you a simple automotive choice.
Japanese car electrics or Lucas–Prince of Darkness…?
or
Japanese motorbikes versus British ones…?

Or a Toyota versus–what??–oh Rover?
(and of course my Toyota was made in Derby.)

People like engineering to work and through years of neglect and incompetance in British engineering, it often didn’t!
Why would the British Government not want a wealthy and forward looking company to buy a site in Surrey and open a facilty which employs local people?
Would you prefer unemployment or has the last fifty years passed you by somehow?

As for kicking the Germans out–well I find xenophobia unattractive at best.

A.

Stuart

hear, hear!

…..anyone for a corgi burger? 😮 I’ll get me coat.