Hilary's account of this in his C+ article is not to his usual very lucid level, so I suspect he too may be struggling with scraps of dickey data.
Stratton quoted Hilary as: "Bilamination construction was first introduced by Claud Butler, as far as we can tell in 1948 in the first version of the Avant Courier model. Paris Cycles also used a similar construction method-so Claud Butler cannot claim it as a first..."
This is dodgy. Somebody develops a new construction method and it gets a name. Now if Claud devised the method first and also gave it the name, Paris's ain't in the picture. If Paris's devised the method first and also gave it the name, Claud ain't in the picture. But Hilary suggests Paris's developed the method first and Claud adopted the name later. If so, he is wrong to say "Bilamination construction was first introduced by Claud Butler", it should be "Bilamination construction was first introduced by Paris Cycles, although the name was coined later by Claud Butler, who developed a similar method in 1948, as far as we can tell". If it was just that Claud got to the Patent office first, surely Paris's would not be allowed to make any bi-lams.
It seems to me that some people happily accept that Claud is credited with Bi-lamination because he thought up the name. So let me give two examples:
1) Drs Banting and Best discover a substance, they name it Isletin. Their boss, Prof Johnson pooh poohs it, shifts them to another task and publishes under his own name, but first he renames it Insulin. He gets caught. History records Banting and Best discovered insulin (Johnson's name).
2) The French put a pole across 2 wheels and call it a velocipede. Years later a Scot makes a bicycle with pedals driving rods to the rear wheel. We both claim to have invented the bicycle. We say that without a means of propulsion it ain't a bike, they say bollocks (in French). We each try to define what constitutes a bicycle to suit ourselves. Why bother? If the bi-lam logic is right we Brits can claim it because we coined the NAME bicycle, they called it velocipede, even the name bicyclette came later. (oops, before CR timeline so OT) ;^)
I hope this shows that the inventor is the person who is first to come up with the goods, or the patent, naming is another issue. So the salient questions seem to be:
1) Is Hilary right in saying Clauds first Bi-lam was the AC in 1948? 2) Can we put a date on the launch of Clauds AC? (Earl's Court Show 48?) 3) When was Paris's first Bi-lam frame offered? 4) Can we put a date on the launch of Paris's first Bi-lam?
Most of us cannot answer any one of the above, yet the data must be out there somewhere.
Can you answer, or even part answer any one? My next post will look at defining Bi-lam.
Norman Kilgariff, saving for a bi-lam zimmer (Glasgow, Scotland)
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign!