Nominate an Engineering Hero

This will be very difficult there are so many to choose from. can we have a 1 - 10 list?

Sure can - nominate your favourite (OK a few if you're really torn ) and a look at this thread in due course will hopefully be showing some overall ranking (and also some good lesser known people ). Depending on how this develops I will try to make a summary of postings (repeat postings by Guests will be noted )

ps - I'd specified 'Engineer' in a sort of attempt to narrow the ground .

BW you are right there are just so many that it is hard to choose just one.

If I was to choose though I would go with Galileo Galilei . If you read about Galileo you will note that he pretty much used established mathmatics and physics of the time but he did so in a manner very much inline with being an Engineer taking the science from theory to practical. He did this at some risk to himself, at the time when he was looking to the stars he was doing so in direct violation of church orders (His church and religion of the time). Galileo challenged a powerful belief system with science of the times and won, that is just amazing.

NOTE: I did not say in anyway shape or form the Galileo challenged 'god' (whatever form he takes), I said he challenged a belief system.

I have a really well known hero but I still think hes the most brilliant mind in history, Leonardo da Vinci.

No doubt on Leonardo . Probably the ultimate polymath.

Still do not know if I would call him the greatest but Isambard Kingdom Brunel was a true engineer, not only did he design, but he built and managed projects on a scale Da Vinci did not. Da Vinci was more of a combination of scientist, artist, mathematician and engineer, being the one of the most intelligent men does not make him a good engineer. My opinion of an engineer is someone who can design, plan, and execute on a grand scale. Being the sole designer is not what it takes, a true engineer must be able to see the greater picture and put all the peices of the puzzle together. If not your are just one of the puzzle pieces.

Great engineers are the people who drove the industrial revolution, when the world took off, they had the technical understanding and they had the driving force required to push boundaries forward. Maybe there have been great achievements from other civilizations throughout history. Civilizations who built on a grand scale, developed public water supply and sanitation systems and gave us the wheel, where there was nothing before. But who were they, and did the speed at which they developed meet those of the industrial revolution, when the skies were black by day and red by night.

Well I would not put her first but I think Margaret Thatcher should receive some thought-she designed the bridge of the Americas and went on to take on a lesser demanding role as British Prime Minister!

Margaret Thatcher was a Chemist and Lawyer before Politics - a woman worthy of respect (even by those who do not agree with her politics ). My (surprised ) check revealed that the Bridge of the Americas was named after a ship that was named after Maurice Thatcher. Looking for that provided lots of interesting stuff Dr Tom , so it was a useful nomination . I suspect Mrs Thatcher is adept at crossing metaphorical bridges , by any means !

I respect her ability to think , not what she did. I got royally stuffed by her and the politics of greed that she introduced. She started the beginning of the end in my opinion. I'll leave it at that , as it certainly would send me off the edge thinking about her too much.

MARGARET THATCHER...you are having a laugh!

The only thing Margaret Thatcher engineered was the demise of British Heavy Industry.

Not to mention our coal mines, we had retained them and invested in clean efficient ways of using the stuff maybe wouldn't be trailing behind half the world.

About the only thing she did right was the Falklands....a great proving ground for the Harrier Jump Jet....another Brithish invention, we have given away

hi guys/gals..

you all missed the obvious.. GOD

for Christians let it be GOD, for muslims Allah, for Hindus Vishnu....and finally for atheists call is NATURE (sorry for my ignorence on other religions!)

Think of life..think of everything around us.. try to understand how everything is engineered so marvellously..may be there are some faults, but comparing the complex nature of the entire work those are negligible (don't you agree!- Imagine number of faults we encounter when we try to design a simple mechanism)

I am not trying to bring religion into this forum, but think carefully about things which we take for granted today in our life..

God stuffed the whole world.

If the "G" man is such a great engineer then why do humans mutilate and kill each other for pleasure? Why do terrorist commit suicide and blowup children in his name? Why is it that the air is poisonous and killing us with every breath? Why are so many animals going extinct? I could list point after point for hours on how the "G" man stuffed us but then again since the "G" man is not human nor an engineer he is not subject to peer review on his designs nor held to any design code..... A shame really things could have been so much better if he had been.

If the world had been produced by committee, then there would be:

no storms - so no way to create some of the most beautiful sights on the planet.

no night - so we would be able to save on lighting (daylight saving in the extreme)

no mountains or valleys - so roads would be level

etc, etc..................

I'd prefer it the way it is, thanks!

As the original poster's requirements for engineering hero are so broad, I am going to have to side with Sisira on this one, God (or the concept) is a valid nomination. The human body is a marvelous piece of engineering, from the brain and central nervous system right up to the self repair features. Of course there are some flaws such as the appendix which is now, or always was, a completely useless waste of space (depending on whether you believe in Divine creation, natural evolution, alien interference, or a combination of the above).

Now, as for human nature, ahhh, that is something entirely different. No matter what you believe in, free-will and choice is a constant that has always been with us. It is certainly not a flaw, merely a feature. Remember a gun is a marvelous engineering feat (from a design point of view) but is only a tool by itself. Remember guns don't kill people, people (who choose to) kill people.

God subject to peer review. LOL.

God subject to peer review. LOL.

Why not? 'god' may only be a little green or maybe its grey creature named Zippo running unsanctioned experiments.

Or it could also be put as 'Who's god', I doubt that Allah is also known as Budda. But then again when it comes to religion and 'god', mine is better than yours. Why you ask, simple it's my opinion.

What next. How about lawyers filing suits against the creator, or the universe in general, for faulty product design resulting in loss of life and duress.

God has been blamed for a lot of things, and so many people have been killed supposedly in his name. Lets cut him/her/concept a little slack and rejoice in the gift that is our self-aware existence and try and make the world a better place for all of us.

I just want to leave the world a little better than what it was . Hooray for free-will.

I just want to leave the world a little better than what it was . Hooray for free-will.

You have higher aspirations than I that is for sure, my goal is to have fun while I'm here.

As the op , I have no problem at all with 'God' (however people define 'God') being on a list of suggestions. My intention was 'Engineer' in the sense of somebody who might have an interest in CR4 were they around to use it. In that sense , God doesn't need to be on the list. Perhaps people could simply add " + God" to their nominated Engineer , if they feel strongly about Gods inclusion . The thread might veer from my intention if we all get into a religious debate , and it may be better to let the thread run a while before arguing the validity of whoever emerges as the most popular candidate (in my intended meaning) else discussion could become a bit too personal.

This is not directed at just you Guest , I simply wanted to drop my opinion in somewhere. This is CR4 , so people are free to interpret a question as they see it.

Kris

Interesting, can I inspect the blue prints? I'm sure there could be one or two improvements......................

What if God is a human creation, just a coefficient in an equation to satisfy all of the missing unknowns for a known outcome?

He would still need an appropriate link provided ! This has the advantage of me not having to be judgemental on validity of nomination , or engage in religious debate.

Archimedes - 2000+ years later, and were still screwing it up his way (water, that is)

Archimedes is great , it's a shame there is nobody to credit fot the shadouf since it changed civilization on the Nile. Likewise the inventor of the rag-pump as shown by Agricola , which was presumably a big factor in mining mechanization and the industrial revolutution. Come to think of it , devices to manage water are probably one of the most fundamental inventions alongside the wheel.

(ps - my browser flagged your 3rd link as a security risk)

(checked it out - the link is fine, just seems to have the wrong certificate)

I suppose we're back to "god" for the original irrigation?

I would like to nominate James Watt, inventor of the steam engine, planetary gear boxes and centrifugal governors etc. He has kept me employed. Come to think of it he kept my father and grandfather employed too. I would definitely buy the man a beer! www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt%2C_James

He might prefer a single malt.

Watt is a good suggestion . I'm expecting to see a lot of Scottish people - plenty of great Engineers who made an impact all around the World.

That reminds me , it's time for a change of my quote - Lord Kelvin deserves a break !

Please feel free to continue bagging Lord Kelvin. I use his temperature scale all the time for bush fire calculations and it is very usefull in rattling my boss's absolute faith in the infalability of the gentleman's temp scale.

Kelvin has a brief stay of execution.

The Romans. Look at how much of their technology we still use. Jess, New Zealand

Bit vague Jess , but good.We got them linked to the space shuttle on some thread. Do you ,or anyone else out there , have a specific Roman Engineer to name - there's got to be some records on specific Romans about (I'm feeling too lazy to check it)

I don't' have any specific name for Roman engineer simply because they get their technology by Greeks ARISTOTELIS PITHAGORAS ARCHIMIDIS EFCLIDIS DIMOCRITOS etc

Hi Kris,

I know you were looking for names, and, I can't supply one: but, what about the engineers behind the pyramids.

From http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/299582/Secrets+of+a+lost+world.htm

"The 146m-high prism of about two million giant limestone slabs, many of them weighing up to 70 tonnes, has been the subject of almost unequalled analysis throughout the ages but the great structure is yet to yield up its biggest secret: how it was built."

I think I'd still go for some of the normal suspects but these guys deserve a mention.

Thanks Randall,

There are a number of threads around CR4 that cover some aspects of the Pyramids (including the 'inside- out' hypothesis).

I think I'm correct in saying that very recently a ROV was about to explore a second door in one of the Pyramids (the door is along a very narrow inclined shaft). Also I vaguely recall a few names being known of people involved in the construction (largely by inferred evidence). I'll try to track down a link when I get a chance. I'm not to clued up in other pyramids around the world (theres an awful lot , as the basic shape is a natural one for convergent/simultaneous evolution). ET will not feature in my analysis of how this post go's ( Just in case anybody out there was tempted ! Post it in the fashion of "+ God" if you must)

I'll stick my neck out and put in Imhotep who is recognized as an Architect and Builder

I would give a vote to Robert Hooke, he defined the laws of elasticity in metals which govern all of our stress calculations. He was also an architect & biologist but seems to be one of those forgotten heroes.

http://www.roberthooke.org.uk/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hooke

He's cool . I like his versatility and connections. Among other things , he worked with-

John Wilkins (flying machines)

John Willis (Chemistry)

Robert Boyle (air pumps)

I can see why he didn't get on with Newton , my reference says "He anticipated newton with his law of the inverse square in gravitation (1678) "

Hello Chris,

I am sorry if I diverted attention of everbody from your original intention. Anyway I never thought some would respond so harsh.. it would have been nicer those of who says he should not be did so by offering better candidates with their reasons. In fact I had another choice, Thomas Alwa Edison but then I preferred to nominate his creater!

One could have given a lot of reasons against a lot of people who have been nominated, but the point is to be positive and make your own nominee and try to give reasons.

Anyway as you suggested let us keep GOD aside from this debate, I do not wish to harm any persons feelings.

So my dear friends... look far beyond people like Watt... He would not have any use of his invention without the wheel .. what about NO NAME who invented the lever.

Try to look at the sea from the sky and not from top of a single small wave. I assure it is a better view. ( hope you all get what I am trying to say)

The aborigine who made the first boomerang, without all that aerodynamic alanysis!

Or the fellow who first harnessed the energy of a springy sapling in the form of a bow...and what a feat of engineering to apply fletchings to the projectile spin stabilising it!

Those flakers of flint who we easilly dissmiss yet were doubtless skilled artisans and masters of their materials?

Sir Frank Whittle who battled indifference and dissbelief to produce a working jet engine....where are the developers of new engines now, when we really need a new efficient power source?

Thanks Del t c , I'll note that as Sir Frank Whittle since the others can't be identified (except for numerous others in aviation).

Hi Sisira , I had expected to see Edison (given the large American membership ) but think that many would classify him more as an 'inventor' because of the astonishing list of things he created. He undoubtedly was an Engineer of huge influence (both directly in his inventions/skills and the way he inspired others). Thanks.

Thomas Edison was a thief and a criminal, and most of the good ideas he supposedly had, he stole. Working through his inside man at the patent office, who delayed the work of other patents pending, Edison was permitted first claims on lots of ideas that were not his.

One true engineer, possible the greatest in all recorded history, was Nikola Tesla, father of the entire domain of alternating current electrical technology. He not only invented the techology as an engineer, but develped the science to go underpin it. He, along with George Westinghouse and Co, harnessed Niagara Falls. Tesla is also the official inventor of Radio, Remote Control, and several other fundamental technologies, too numerous to mention.

The great pyramids were not created by a human, but by a 'god' Ra. Humans are a creation of the mixing of 'god' DNA and neanderthal DNA, creating workers or ADAMAS. We are made in their image.

With regards to "God", nobody has met that being and lived, or can get a straight answer, so cannot reasonably be regarded in this category. Besides, God is equivalent to Nature. Engineers are those who take the principles of Nature (or God) and apply them to produce solutions to technical problems. Besides, most engineers don't think they are God...lol Does God think he's (or she) is an engineer?

Chris

Thanks Chris , any nomination is fine by me . Tesla

Just for general info of all , I'm trying to put in a link for nominations where not given. It saves anyone browsing time , and makes it easier to scan through to see who gets mentioned.

How about Benjamin Franklin?? Without his discovery of electricity, we wouldn't have CR4, or anything electricial for that matter. (I'm sure someone else would find out though, but who would have thought to put a key at the end of a kite to see if he can catch the lightning??)

MidniteFighter

Franklin was a great American , and certainly helped change the world. Have you noticed how he , like others nominated , was an incredible polymath. People of genius seem to be able to turn their hand to anything. Wow , that could spark a great "Is genius born debate" - it might spiral way off CR4 general topicality though (?).

Such a span to cover:

Latest research does indeed hold that genius (as well as just smart) is probably "born."

I'm not debating god with a "guest" and not in this forum, here we admire his work and the applications we have found. Engineering is mans opposition to entropy.

I'd like to nominate one of the unsung, Ada Lovelace who working with Babbage (to what degree is still debated) and pretty much invented my whole industry - software.

And Edison was the first "pointy-haired boss."

Think I covered it.

Lovelace and Babbage it is then.

Alexander Graham Bell was a very prolific inventor and experimenter. I do believe he is credited with the invention of the telephone, as an engineering example. He was also part of a team building airplanes and seeking to be the first powered flight airplane. He was also a professor.

Chris

Thanks Chris.

Could you add a link next time ?

I don't intend to sound patronizing to anybody , but this may help others reading this thread - If you know a good web site detailing something , highlight an appropriate piece of text whilst in the editor box. Got to the globe icon , then paste the address into the URL section and click submit. It enables quick reference , and also you are ensuring an appropriate reference for readers . Few people here so far seem to have done this . It also saves everybody from me hogging space in doing it !

Cheers , Kris

Okay, will do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Graham_Bell

With respect to Nikola Tesla, most of my learning comes from books, but Wiki is usually an excellent source for most references.

Chris

Michael Faraday

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday

Hi Kris,

My Engineering heroes are two: Burt Rutan the revolutionary aerospace engineering genius, and Konrad Suze the German inventor of the first all-purpose electronic computer driven by an all-purpose algorithmic programming language (Plankalkul), a few years prior to ENIAC.

Here, building his first computer, in his parent's flat, during WW2

, The Language, explained here

The bottom reference "...his first computer..." is of Z4, his first general-purpose programmable computer, from 1942.

The man built several electro mechanical dummies serving as technology proofs, starting with Z1, as early as 1936.

Great post Yuval. Both those people are inspirational . Not being into aerospace or computing , I found the links really interesting to help patch up my knowledge a bit.

One thing that struck me was that search.com , seemed to say Turing was well supported by Government . Like many other great people , he was used by the 'system' and his untimely death was a tragedy for us all.

When his team built "Colossus", and it was a part of the war effort, no one minded his known associates, some which helped in his accusation, in order to further their career. Regular snake pit.

Later, after the war, and following his suicide, a top-brass forgot his name said of him something to the effect of "I wouldn't say we won the war because of him, but I would say we would have lost it without him"

For those wishing to see some Rutan aerospace designs, go to:

http://www.air-and-space.com/Rutan.htm

I like the Oblique-wing , and Proteus is even more surreal . I saw some weird stuff at a model aircraft club (powered stuff ). Some of the shapes they had in the air and pulling stunts was amazing - It defied all intuition that they could fly.

Reply to Dell the cat's quote:

... MARGARET THATCHER About the only thing she did right was the Falklands....a great proving ground for the Harrier Jump Jet....another Brithish invention, we have given away.

I honestly regret having read your comment, as this is a painful subject for many people in my country as in yours.

Let's hear another bell:

Malvinas Islands (AKA Falklands) are a part of our Continental Platform.

Therefore they are as British as Ireland is Argentinean.

In the early '80s our former government: a military "Junta" (Military Dictators) supported by CIA -in their war against communism- was loosing power. So, this jerks decided to build up popularity by invading the islands. This was done with no UK citizen's casualties.

Former US president Mr. Reagan and Mrs. Thatcher had the tools for making our dictators step back… but they also had a popularity issue at home; reason for which they decided to engage in a battle they certainly would easily win, as they did…

Results of the war: 250 / 300 UK dead. On our side: perhaps 800+ dead. Actual number of casualties was conveniently hidden by the "Junta". Our "soldiers" were 18 year old boys with no military training. 350 committed suicide after the war.

Some months after their defeat, the Junta called for free elections. We have had a stable democracy for the last 35 years. British tax payers are still paying the bills of this war. Multinational holdings are profiting from Malvinas's natural resources (oil / fishery). UK lost the harrier to US, French Exocet missiles (nobody was interested in before war) used by our Air Force gained immense popularity… about 1500 families worldwide are still grieving their dead.

Cosme

PS: My excuses to the rest of the forum...

I'm sincerely sorry for any distress...and she should not have ordered the sinking of the Belgrano.

At least the conflict was contained and away from too many civilians.

Again sorry, I don't want to enter into any attempt at justification.

However it was a minor skirmish compared with the debacle that is Iraq.

(But I shall refrain from going off on that subject as this isn't the right forum..)

Derek

Same humbleness is required to apologize as to accept them!

No bad feelings

Cosme

There is a family of Stephensons who deserve a mention for assisting safe sailing between UK and the "New World".

Hey , you muddled the spelling and link GM ! There is also Stevenson who did Railway stuff '

People are going to get really confused ! I'll leave everyone to click the links , it's easier than explaining the muddle.

As you have beaten me to George Stevenson, I will ask you to consider Thomas Telford, who built numerous roads and bridges throughout Britain. He also refused a knighthood!

He also refused a knighthood!

Now that's what I call class !! Telford could be my new hero just for that .

Hi kris - just proving I'm not perfect !-}

Have you read about Pam's travels? No wonder I get confuddled.

I might have guessed she went through an un-accredited west-coast 'uni' . Sorry to anyone out there , but I think her qaulification is worthless paper* . rant, rant. It's a valid link since she followed a genuine nomination (even though not related ! - either they only told her after the cruise , or she thought some credibility may get stuck to her ). She should have stuck to 'acting' in a more conventional sense. I'm glad you provided me with ammo on her though GM

*Feel fre to rebuke me on that anyone. Just indulging myself with a bit of ranting.

Her piece of paper

Kris's use of the spell-checker

Pamela Stephenson + California Graduate Institute = Pseudo babble

Don't Fret , the explanation is fre

I was agreeing - your spelling had nearly as many holes in it as her "degree"

Thought so , just clarrifying . My spelling is attrocious ! The grammer is just as bad , and don't even ask me where you put an apostrophe -Lynn Truss would probably want to string me up.

Hey ,, Yuval I'm cutting corners myself here -John harrison . At least the Government stopped short by only robbing him. The list of mal-treated Engineers and Scientists is worth a thread in it's own right.

"...The list of mal-treated Engineers and Scientists is worth a thread..."

A blessing in disguise?

Newton was fairly rewarded, appointing him head of the royal mint, no less, where he found the time to wage his private set of wars against scientific rivals, top of his list, the Leibniz mafia from Germany, exerting his influence to stop or delay their publishing of papers (until his published first) in the Royal Society of England, then being like today's "Nature" magazine, see?

You're quite right - Newton was one of many who could feature in a list of 'Engineering/Science-Gits' just as well as he could here. The notion that any field of endevour is without it's share of gits is plain wrong.

A giant to stand on the shoulders of midgets, or vice versa?

Anyway, sarcasm aside, we use billiard here, as a common demonstration of his genius.

Not to mention infinitesimal calc, and his notions of light and colour.

There is this story, of the Leibniz mafia sending him the pinnacle of their research in the form of a question they were unable to solve related to minimisation and maximisation calc.

The problem was phrased as a conundrum, and sent anonymously to the royal society, addressed to Newton.

They, smug with relentless anticipation, waiting to bathe in his expected long embarrassment, were surprised to receive his prompt mathematical, elegant, and clear solution, addressed back to their household, but unsigned.

Johan Bernoulli, of the Leibniz household, amazed at the prompt reply and elegant solution, mumbled "Tanquam ex ungue leonem" - "I recognise the lion by his paw"

While on formal logic: The Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein, regarded as a philosopher, while his sum of work also regarded as a brilliant and rare case of using formal logic notation (also found in set theory) to express philosophy. Considered a follower of George Boole, the undisputed father of modern algorithmics, at the base of all programming languages, high and low-level alike.

Neat story.

Bluff and secrecy were rampant back then. Mathematicians in particular liked to 'tease' each other with claims of knowing a proof of something. I won't digress much into this other than to suggest that we may never know if Fermats famous marginal note was true or bluff.Did he have an elegant proof , or just a hunch.

"To divide a cube into two other cubes, a fourth power or in general any power whatever into two powers of the same denomination above the second is impossible, and I have assuredly found an admirable proof of this, but the margin is too narrow to contain it. "

Tom (tall) and Dick (short) keep the apartment key on the door sill. They can just reach it , but only if Tom stands on Dicks shoulders. The reason for this is fact (if you can see it ) , and is also proof that Giants must surely stand on the shoulders of others to reach higher. The other way round and their reach is not as high.

Well, now, if we diversify to mathematicians, how about John Napier? Make no bones about it, he helped us on our way!

I should have clarified that Toms longer arm length explains this seemingly odd situation. You can always find a person of different hight and experiment !

(that's me clarifying myself Yuval )

Well then how about Harrison, who built the first clock accurate enough for ocean-length navigation

The only problem with his invention was that the ships forgot to stop!

there are so many heroes in engineering the list could go on for ever, I could add to my previous post Joseph Whitworth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Whitworth, Henry Maudslay http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Maudslay & Joseph Bramah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Bramah.

I like those , and the theme. All good hands-on people with machine shop skills. Cool.

Are there any heroes from the present era? One that I admired greatly, sadly no longer with us, was Professor Eric Laithwaite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Laithwaite as much for his attitude & persistence as anything else.

Hi Nigh ,

You may see in the Challenge Question about the suitacase , that I have done a bit to promote him . A great presenter , who as far as I know , was shunned by the establishment in recent years. I too admire him very much. Kris.

Hey Kris,

What if we start repeating ourselves in our lengthy tour of the familiar and revered?

It would help find a most popular choice , as long as it's not the same people doing it.

I constantly repeat myself , so anybody else is welcome to do so. Bring your own white jacket though.

And the giants Linus Pauling, and his contemporary Richard Feynman

I noticed that Pauling's cause of death was listed as Prostate Cancer. This is very common 'cause of death' in the UK , due (I read ) to the fact that older males will almost always have some degree of prostate problem (often cancer ) at the time of death. The linking of Prostate cancer to cause of death is the subject of controversy.

As an addition to modern greats , how about Stephen Hawking who I can only understand a minuscule fraction of. I don't know if Hawking has diverse interests like your two nominations (apart from his obvious illness - I wonder if his name would be so widely known without it , given that few can grasp such complex problems as he tackles). Simpson's and being a space tourist taken as known (I couldn't find a vid for the latter).

This may not exactly qualify for my intention but I'm going to say it anyway.

John Haynes.

The original ones were the best - giving all wiring A-to-B.

Latterly, the connections to the wiring harness are shown, so no indication of where wires actually lead - this has delays and headaches which the older books did not. I still will not replace an entire harness for one bad connection.

And don't get me started on finding "refer to chapter XX" every other line!

And don't get me started on finding "refer to chapter XX" every other line!

That's really annoying in a sequential book , when chapter XX is further ahead than you've got to. Frequent repetition usually indicates 'find a better' book/guide or whatever. I haven't looked at a Haynes in years - I think some specific titles are quite hard to get hold of .

Two engineers stand out in my book. First one being Tesla and the second one being Kosciuszko. Everybody knows about Tesla but Kosciuszko is little less known. He was a Polish general who also came to the US to help fight the American Revolution. Head engineer of the Continental Army. Built several forts and fortified military camps, including the ones for the turning point in the American Revolution, Saratoga Springs. If you live next to Saratoga there is actually a major bridge named after him but since nobody can say it, they call it "Twin Bridges".

Thanks pdajewski (and welcome to CR4 ! ).

I can see why the Belarusian variation of Kosciuszko is not used much by English speakers. It's great to hear about lesser known Engineers - I'd not heard this one before (the American Revolution doesn't feature high on UK school curriculum's ! )

Kosciuszko is the highest mountain in Australia so most people in Australia have heard of him. Edmund de Strzelecki was an explorer and surveyor and he named the Mountain after his fellow countryman. How many other engineers have been honoured in such an appropriate manner?

I did know about the mountain being named after him but just learned about it recently. I mostly learned about Kosciuszko from Polish history classes and not from US history classes. In the US they don't talk about him much even though he was an important figure here. A lot of things are named after him and not just in Poland and Australia but also US and other eastern European countries. Very important guy.

Robert_Stephenson and Joseph_Bazalgette are often overshadowed by others, and their achievements under-appreciated.

Adrian Vaughan's book Isambard Kindom Brunel - Engineering Knight-Errant? is an interesting counterbalance to Tom Rolt's earlier glowing biography of IKB and the careers of the above two need to be considered in the context of what both Rolt and Vaughan have written about.

Bazalgette has me salivating every time I hear the name ! A completely wrong choice of phrase , but wow. The effect resulting from his work in London is beyond calculation. To make something so good that people forget it's there is brilliance. What a shame it wasn't continually maintained. There are probably benefits to letting it overload then doing a drastic upgrade , but everything from concept and design to workmanship is pure genius. The sewers are one of London's least celebrated treasures.

Brunel is a giant of the industrial revolution, with influence far beyond England. His influence may be more in American 19th century architecture and civil construction, than some glorified English bridges.

Note the American homage to his creation in "Wild, Wild West" movie.

You Goblin Yuval ! You know perfectly well that he was vertically challenged , or as we say in the UK a runt. If you want me to rant about British bridge excellence you will have to do better . I will dig out a superb example from file if pushed. Parting the sea will receive my full admiration if you can prove and replicate the technique.

Goblin I am and damn proud of it. Better to admit to lousy truth than some glorified fake.

"...If you want me to rant about British..." Why rant? Look at it as-is. Some like this beautiful giant glass-and-steel greenhouse for the world exhibition wasn't even a bridge. It was brunel's wasn't it? It influenced architecture worldwide, some 50 years later.

Ever since you called ma a Goblin , I carry the badge with pride . Somebody , somewhere loves me ! Have you read up on the 'Great Exhibition' ? It may have been designed around the principle of asserting Brit dominance ( ie most exhibits were British etc) , but there was some very good engineering as a result. The methods for supplying glass were a huge advance. Using trolley's sliug under girders was revolutionary. The whole concept of putting together a complete project was amazing. I could waffle on , or you could google it. Which do you prefer - one of my cars needs attention.. Tick , tick , tick...

According to British mythology (bare with me here, it's not off-topic) is the Green Manalishi (With the two-prong crown) a kind of a goblin, or is he a mere up-to-the-minute invention of Peter Green?

Green, an engineering hero of it's own, or at least a brilliant blues technician, deserve it's merit, in spite of being a FJ (Hebrew for British). Don't you think?

After all, there is a goblin, and there is a goblin, or would you say a goblin is a goblin is a goblin