I have to agree. What should have been a great read is let down by very poor editing. For example, in a single sentence on page 92 we have Richard Roberts being born in 1789, and in 1790 taking out his first patent on an automatic, fully power driven mule: a remarkably precocious achievement! How on earth did this clunker get through? Elsewhere Robert Stephenson becomes (for a single page) Robert Stevenson, a mistake mirrored by the index. There are many excessively long sentences that require re-reading multiple times before they make sense.
I found all this very frustrating because Mr Crump is clearly an expert in an exciting subject. The poor editing is enormously distracting when trying to read what should have been a rewarding book, and the blame lies squarely with the publisher for simply not caring.