I don't think anybody is suggesting that the smoke manipulation degrades the authenticity of the photo or takes anything away from the 999. I just see it as interesting and curious historical research clues embedded in old photographs. I guess there is always the potential issue of photo image manipulation crossing over some ethical line, depending on the intent. But this appears to be no more than artistic license to compensate for the inability to stop the motion with photography of that era.

The photgrapher must have decided that it was important to show a lot of fine mechanical detail as well as the suggestion of speed. I believe I have seen other 999 photos that do not stop the action of running fast. One problem with using fast lenses and film to stop the action in order to see the detail is that you lose the sense of action.

RTK

Not if you are a Brit; they continue to this day to discredit the feat!

Steve Zuiderveen

What was the reason for reducing the driver diameter on the 999?

RTK

Funny thing the British were mentioned with 999. My son was given a British children's train book that shows a photo of 999 and then explains that the engine was not the first to exceed 100mph as many think. I have a regular joke about this with some British friends, they tolerate me on this topic, especially after the City of Truro restoration showed some evidence that it might not have been able to make the speed claimed for it. I can imagine that when the high drivers were installed on 999, it probably wasn't the most flexible engine on the roster, but it certainly had to be a speedster.

David Farlow

The British don't so much discredit the feat as point out that the 999 record is not up to the standards of British speed-recording. American mileposts, as opposed to British mileposts, are often whimsical fantasy as opposed to exact measurements, whereas in Britain it's actually possible (okay, I did so in 1991) to purchase booklets that indicate the precise distance between the official mileposts of today on various lines, the better to calibrate your stopwatch timings.

In other words, the 999 record would fail as a Guinness Book of World Records entry today because necessary documentation and proof of calibration of speedometers, etc. could not be provided. Every British record that I have seen claimed and advanced included calibrated dynamometer cars and/or multiple stopwatch-using train timers with extensive experience. I think the latest French record claims, and the recent British speed runs (records for routes and/or equipment but not outright speed) even included GPS units.

I understand your note, but with this being the case, why is the City of Truro record in question now? I guess they decided to look more closely at this run as well??

David Farlow

I think you refer to the PRR #7002 speed record at Elida, Ohio of 127 MPH
that the British dispute with their precisely timed speed of 125 MPH with Mallard. The 999 with 112.5 is old news. But while we're at it - if you could not take a shot of the engine doing a high speed; where did they get the shot of the smoke?

Maybe from a freight engine laboring along on a train at 15 mph.

Probably to make it less slippery and more practical to use in normal day operations. Once the record was set; such high bursts of speed were probably not needed.

It sounds like there were other examples of the same class; it may have made 999 the same as the others and hence interchangable.

I have a picture of that engine and the "time card" for the record breaking trip in a book entitled "The Locomotive up to Date". The original printing was 1899. The copy I have was reprinted in 1906.