RMweb Gold russ p Posted March 15, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 15, 2020 1 hour ago, gordon s said: Does this qualify? Don't think I've ever seen a 2-6-4 tender engine before. Tender looks like one of those door closers 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Cane Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 This early cab forward must be a good contender. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 39 minutes ago, russ p said: Don't think I've ever seen a 2-6-4 tender engine before. Tender looks like one of those door closers They are Austrian, and being Compounds feature in John van Riemsdyk's 'Compound Locomotives' book. I've just finished reading this, and it's a must for anyone who wants to look at photos of ugly locomotives. Just because the Midland managed to make some beautiful looking compounds didn't stop the rest of the World producing weird and ugly ones. Speaking of the Midland, how about the NCC's 3 foot gauge Atlantic tanks for ugliness? https://www.ballycastlehistory.com/meccano-magazine-1937.html 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ramblin Rich Posted March 15, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 15, 2020 (edited) GWR 15xx (Wiki commons image) And their possible 'inspirations' the USA tanks ( Wikipedia image) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USATC_S100_Class#/media/File%3AKESR_22_Maunsell_(Southern_62).JPG Both functional admittedly but well away from the Victorian elegance of, say, the Midland Spinners or Compounds. More up to date, Duck-face Shinkansen (Japan-guide.com image) https://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2018_tokaido.html Edited March 15, 2020 by Ramblin Rich 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted March 15, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted March 15, 2020 5 hours ago, jonny777 said: For EMUs I would have to say these things. I mean, they already had the cab design of the 442s. To cut costs they could have ditched the curved cab windows; but who in heavens name thought this was a decent front end design for a 21st century train? I’d say the cold dead hand of Oliver Bulleid has a part to play, by way of the SUBs, EPBs, CEP/CIG etc, PEP and derivates, 313s, eyc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 6 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said: There seem to have been quite a few Irish examples such as and... Is there an aesthetically pleasing Irish loco? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 7 minutes ago, number6 said: Is there an aesthetically pleasing Irish loco? Most of them. A fair few were virtually exact copies of Midland Railway locomotives. Dunluce Castle is very similar to a 2P. How about Maeve? Looks a bit like a Royal Scot. Fowler 2-6-4T Then there was all the Caledonian influenced 4-4-0 and 0-6-0s. Jason 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2020 7 hours ago, jonny777 said: For EMUs I would have to say these things. I mean, they already had the cab design of the 442s. To cut costs they could have ditched the curved cab windows; but who in heavens name thought this was a decent front end design for a 21st century train? Reminds me of those breeds of dog that look like they've run in to a wall at speed. 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4901 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 How about most American camelback locomotives? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2020 The original DMU's for the Glasgow - Edinburgh service - the Class 126, has to be considered as one of the worst looking. That batch had a reasonable cab front, but the intermediate cars for joining 2 x 3 car sets had an a gangway connection instead and looked simply awful. They later had the corridor connectors removed, but did this improve the front end at all - not in the slightest! The later batches for the Ayr services had split 4 character either side of the gangway. 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny777 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 1 hour ago, kevinlms said: The original DMU's for the Glasgow - Edinburgh service - the Class 126, has to be considered as one of the worst looking. That batch had a reasonable cab front, but the intermediate cars for joining 2 x 3 car sets had an a gangway connection instead and looked simply awful. They later had the corridor connectors removed, but did this improve the front end at all - not in the slightest! The later batches for the Ayr services had split 4 character either side of the gangway. Thanks Kevin, I had forgotten about those. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tomparryharry Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2020 8 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: Most of them. A fair few were virtually exact copies of Midland Railway locomotives. Dunluce Castle is very similar to a 2P. How about Maeve? Looks a bit like a Royal Scot. Jason That is a pretty-looking locomotive. Looks like it has a touch of a Jubilee about it. Stanier gets everywhere! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lurker Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Some of the outside framed GWR classes - the Kruger class for example Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2020 4 hours ago, jonny777 said: Thanks Kevin, I had forgotten about those. I used to go to school at Bishopbriggs for a few years and these monstrosities went past all day. One day, one broke down opposite the school grounds, it took at least an hour to shift it. There was a huge bank up of other trains behind it. I did see some of the trials for the Push-Pull services, some with Class 37's or 25's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2020 20 hours ago, jonny777 said: For EMUs I would have to say these things. I mean, they already had the cab design of the 442s. To cut costs they could have ditched the curved cab windows; but who in heavens name thought this was a decent front end design for a 21st century train? A Class 126 with fairings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tomparryharry Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2020 I'll offer up the South African S class. But, once again, it does what it says on the tin (well, sort of) There is also an Australian (or Tasmanian) Garrat that is a real horror. The chief engineer resigned, rather than be associated with it (allegedly). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post EddieB Posted March 16, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted March 16, 2020 I must confess to a soft spot for many of the nominees, from the Q1 to the Gölsdorf 2-6-4. Here’s my bête noir (or its Spanish equivalent), a Crosti conversion of a Norte 2-8-0. (Not my photo). 7 7 1 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 That's a cracker! Give the man a prize...... 8 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swampy Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 How about the Camden and Amboy 6-2-0. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 35 minutes ago, EddieB said: I must confess to a soft spot for many of the nominees, from the Q1 to the Gölsdorf 2-6-4. Here’s my bête noir (or its Spanish equivalent), a Crosti conversion of a Norte 2-8-0. (Not my photo). The Ford Edsel of the locomotive world! (Google edsel and see...) 4 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold A Murphy Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2020 (edited) I think commentary is superfluous..... Henry Hoy's 1903 effort for the L&Y. Sorry the 2-4-2 attached by mistake and I couldn't edit it out Edited March 16, 2020 by A Murphy 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 5 hours ago, tomparryharry said: That is a pretty-looking locomotive. Looks like it has a touch of a Jubilee about it. Stanier gets everywhere! Not bad but they do look a bit like a knock-off version of the real thing! Or a sketch done without looking at the subject. I’m very keen on funny proportioned old fashioned tinplate models and lots of Irish prototypes have that air about them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithMacdonald Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 I wish it was only the old loco designs that threw up some right mingers, and we'd learnt from their mistakes. But then: British Rail Class 385 http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/page/class+385 What were they thinking of (or smoking)? It looks like someone has stuck a Portaloo on the front. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted March 16, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2020 Because the thing looks like sh*t? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted March 16, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2020 1 hour ago, tomparryharry said: I'll offer up the South African S class. But, once again, it does what it says on the tin (well, sort of) There is also an Australian (or Tasmanian) Garrat that is a real horror. The chief engineer resigned, rather than be associated with it (allegedly). You mean the Australian Standard Garratt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Standard_Garratt Some were built in the Victorian railways workshop, where apparently they were considered so bad that they refused to attach their builders plates! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now