From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


The Vickers story is long and complex, being split up and combined again. I reckon it could do with splitting down into the various units. So Vickers would run until Vickers Armstrong, then shipbuilding would split off etc. GraemeLeggett 16:14, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vickers, Sons & Maxim Ltd. is the firm in an earlier guise. It needs to be mentioned either in this article or in a link to another, since it was from this that firm described developed and VSM was the original producer of the Vickers machine gun. That in turn, was a development of the Maxim gun. The Vickers' Company preceded VSM, having exhibited at the 1851 Great Exhibition. It originated in the late 18th century in the name of Naylor. The name of Vickers entered into its title in 1829. (RJP 19:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC))
My statement above, is not exactly true. Of course, the Maxim gun had been produced before it was associated with the name 'Vickers'. See below. (RJP 15:59, 11 August 2005 (UTC))

Shipbuilding Timeline of the Vickers name[edit]

'1897: Vickers Sons & Maxim Limited bought The Barrow Shipbuilding Company Ltd'

Quotations below are from the Vickers publicity book; Anon, Vickers, sons and Maxim Limited (1898) (reprinted from Engineering) page 5. Vickers, Sons & Maxim was the earliest connection between the Vickers name and the maxim-type guns, in other words, the Vickers machine gun. Of course, Maxim guns had been produced before this - "Later in the same year which saw the acquisition of the Barrow Works [1897], a further step was taken when Messrs. Vickers acquired, by amalgamation, the Maxim-Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Company, Limited, with works at Erith and the neighbourhood, Birmingham, and other places, ..."

According to the 1898 book, the shipbuilding company bought in 1897 was "the Naval Construction and Armaments Company (Limited), at Barrow-in -Furness". This looks like the one noted in the Wikipedia article but I wonder what the Barrow company was in fact, called.

It can be seen from the Maxim-Nordenfelt quotation above, that the shipyard was bought just before the amalgamation which gave rise to the name Vickers, Sons and Maxim. Therefore, both the names in the first line of 'Shipbuilding Timeline of the Vickers name' section need further consideration. (RJP 15:59, 11 August 2005 (UTC))

Canadian Vickers[edit]

Where is the original article on this company? (Bzuk 16:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC))

I don't think the article has ever been created, just a redirect to Vickers (UK). Mark83 17:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Restored back to this version remove IP vanalism-BulldozerD11 (talk) 10:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

History of 6 inch naval gun[edit]

We have a 6 inch naval gun mounted on a display at GEM Village Irene South Africa. The number on the barrel is 2498 year of manufacture 1918 Can anybody assist with any historical info on this barrel. Would appreciate any help Robby Edwards —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Nationalised ?[edit]

'de facto nationalised' (referring to the 1960 merger)

What exactly does this mean? (talk) 19:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The aircraft, engine and weaponry manufacturers were effectively told that contracts would only go to larger companies. These larger companies would though receive help through government research and other aids to development of aircraft. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, but I don't think that 'de facto nationalisation' is an accurate summary of that situation. (talk) 02:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vickers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Vickers/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

  1. Requires infobox
  2. Requires photographs
  3. Requires lead section
  4. Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates
  5. Switch existing references to use one of the {{Cite}} templates
  6. Requires copy edit for WP:MOS
Keith D (talk) 18:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 18:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 09:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)