Talk:British Rail DP1

Colloquial name

Am I alone in finding the introduction to this article ('colloquially known as DP1') a little oddly worded? Is it officially or colloquially called DP1? Is it officially or colloquially called Deltic? I've always (colloquially or otherwise) known it as Deltic. Pterre (talk) 17:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The name Deltic was painted on the sides. The designation DP1 did not appear on the locomotive (at least, not on the outside). --Redrose64 (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. So surely the word 'Deltic' should appear very close to (if not be the first word of) this article? Pterre (talk) 20:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Amended. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

DP1 acronym, also name

According to British Railways Engineering 1948-80 pp. 191, DP1 stood for "Diesel Project 1" whereas the article states "Diesel Prototype 1".. Anyone got primary or better sources to find out which is right?

I can't help wondering if the article title is wrong - it's common (?) knowledge that BR never bought the locomotive, it always remained the property of EE. As DP1 was EE's designation is it correct to say that BR did too.

What was it registered as under BR log books etc ?

I would think "British Railways Deltic prototype" would be a better title, given that, as the article states - everyone called it "Deltic".. ?Prof.Haddock (talk) 23:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

We shouldn't call this article "Deltic" if we aren't first calling the much better known Class 55 "Deltic". Andy Dingley (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, why not? 'Deltic' in its distinctive blue livery was at the time very widely known simply as 'Deltic'. I was not quite 4 when it was withdrawn from service, but remember it very clearly storming through Hornsey Station. The 'much better known' (really? to Rail buffs maybe but surely not the general public?) Class 55 may have been known as the Deltic Class, but not as 'Deltic'. Pterre (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I was the Motive Power Controller, Kings Cross District during the period that the prototype Deltic was operating from Kings Cross and at no time was it ever known as DP1. This appelation is of recent invention and has no basis in fact. The engine was simply known as Deltic. A colleague of mi, Mr P. Webb, was the motive power inspector during the engine's trials between Camden and Edge Hill when it first entered service in 1955 and he also confirms the fact that the title 'DP1' is wholly fictitious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.62.34 (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

As I understand it DP1 was a English Electric designation, not a BR one - it seems (opinion) to have been backcronymed "retronymed" - probably at the time that the DP2 was developed - eg there never was a Mk.1 - until the Mk.2 was introduced.. I think I agree.Prof.Haddock (talk) 22:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't doubt that depot staff never used the designation "DP1", but that doesn't mean that it was fictitious. Wikipedia has a policy on verifiability, and several published works by respected authors like Colin J. Marsden do use the the designation "DP1", so it must have some basis in fact, even if it was only internal to English Electric. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Indeed - British Rail Engineering 1948-80 (editored by a former CE of BR Roland Bond) refers to it as DP1 - however it's worth noting that all the contemporary sources (ie see the further reading), including EE, Nock, and a 1950s journal refer to it as "Deltic", with no reference anywhere to a DP1. If I were making the choice I would probably name the article "English Electric 'Deltic' prototype"

... my theory of a retronym - searching the literature - I found no references to a DP1 until c. 1962/3 - ie the year the DP2 was produced. The J.Inst.Locomotive Engineers article (1958) refers to it as "Deltic" or "the Deltic prototype" with absolutely no mention of a DP1 or anything like.

Somebody who worked at EE might be able to clear this up, but looks like the truth is lost in the mysts of time without much further research.Prof.Haddock (talk) 16:09, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

1959 order.

' An order was placed in 1959 for 22 Class 55s '

No, it wasn't. Class 55 hadn't been invented at that time. What was ordered? 22 Deltics?

86.173.174.134 (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

22 type 5 locomotives of the D90XX class perhaps. It is because of the need for circumlocutionslike this that the TOPS classification was desperately needed by BR. Barney Bruchstein (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on British Railways DP1. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204133231/http://www.ribblesteam.org.uk/exhibits/diesel/105-english-electric-dp1-1955-deltic-prototype to http://www.ribblesteam.org.uk/exhibits/diesel/105-english-electric-dp1-1955-deltic-prototype
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419114842/http://www.traintesting.com/images/Deltic-on-test-near-Armathwaite.jpg to http://www.traintesting.com/images/Deltic-on-test-near-Armathwaite.jpg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Railways DP1. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224110049/http://www.mremag.com/news/article/graham-farish-prototype-deltic-locomotive-dp1-372-920/11991 to http://www.mremag.com/news/article/graham-farish-prototype-deltic-locomotive-dp1-372-920/11991

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Most Powerful Single-Unit Diesel Locomotive in 1955 ?

Do reliable sources support or otherwise the statement that at the time of completion this was the most powerful single-unit diesel locomotive in the world? Barney Bruchstein (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 15 December 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (closed by non-admin page mover) BegbertBiggs (talk) 11:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

---

British Railways DP1 → British Rail DP1 – Any article which begins "British Rail" in some way uses "Rail" instead of "Railways". Even British Rail DP2 uses this format - wouldn't it make more sense for this article to also have the same title? Danners430 (talk) 22:29, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

• Question: Would just moving it to Deltic make more sense per WP:COMMONNAME? This is all I've ever heard at heritage diesel days. YorkshireExpat (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  It not, then Support this move btw. YorkshireExpat (talk) 09:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  I don’t think so - mainly because the Class 55 is also a “Deltic”, so it could cause some confusion. In addition, we have other named trains such as the HST, which are named British Rail Class 43 (HST) Danners430 (talk) 09:53, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

  Oh, sorry, this is the prototype. With you now. YorkshireExpat (talk) 11:22, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Bad move. British Rail didn't exist until after the Deltics were in service.

Also DP1 was never a British Railways loco, it was privately built as a prototype.

As to DP2, then that also pre-dated British Rail. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is there for a reason. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

British Rail Class 350 wasn't built under BR either - it's a naming convention. The article already mostly followed this convention, but used "Railways" instead of "Rail". The move was nothing more than bringing this article in line with convention. Danners430 (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

We have a convention to be wrong? Which policy is that? Andy Dingley (talk) 18:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)