Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Worst looking locomotive topic. Antidote to Best Looking Locomotive topic.


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
38 minutes ago, whart57 said:

Steam tram locomotives are generally boxy and ugly, but this one surely beats the lot when it comes to aesthetic horror

 

image.png.cd1751df287ebeb7b093d4363659a25e.png

 

Make a model of that and no-one will believe you actually finished it.

It would certainly get laughs on 'eBay Madness'!

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, whart57 said:

Steam tram locomotives are generally boxy and ugly, but this one surely beats the lot when it comes to aesthetic horror

 

image.png.cd1751df287ebeb7b093d4363659a25e.png

 

Make a model of that and no-one will believe you actually finished it.

Its finished when you've hemmed the curtains

The rest of the stock was quite attractive https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgooisestoomtram.jouwweb.nl%2Fhuizen

 

Edited by Talltim
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Is that because the cladding is asbestos?

 

Yes, fireless locos (like all steam locos) have/had asbestos cladding with a metal skin round the outside.

 

When 'normal' steam locos are conserved for static display, the asbestos is usually replaced with some other material (such as loft insulation) and the metal skin refitted.

 

When fireless locos are 'conserved', often the outer skin is taken off to remove the asbestos, and then the loco is left like that :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I’ve just encountered, in Robin Barnes’ book, a picture of a provisional 0-6-0, 2F rated design produced by Coleman for the LMS in 1943. This freak of nature combines the minimalist design of the Q1, with conventional steam-loco aesthetics AND inside cylinders and outside valve gear. 

 

I’m unable to find a picture of this online, for which, much thanks... it does, however, prove the adage that “if it looks right, it IS right” by being judged to be of no practical value and not progressed further. 

 

The early 3-cylinder, 4-6-0 Q1 variant looks pretty misbegotten, too. 

 

Personally, I quite like the Q1. It was a very successful design, the ultimate development of the British-style freight 0-6-0. There’s a lot of sound engineering in a Q1 and it shows. 

Edited by rockershovel
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 16/10/2020 at 23:25, Artless Bodger said:

The original London and Blackwall railway used something similar, with carriages clipped to the rope and detaching at each station, you had to join the right carriage for your destination, and for some journeys go to the Minories end and go back. 

They also had problems in the early days with the rope snapping - and when a rope hauling seven carriages snaps, that's a lot of force getting released. The first time it happened, the cable smashed through the viaduct's parapet.

 

(I'm making a video on the L&B, and it really was fascinating - its telegraph operators were the first people to get disciplined for making personal calls on company time, but since they also invented useful codes with which to do it, they were let off)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
15 hours ago, rockershovel said:

This freak of nature combines the minimalist design of the Q1, with conventional steam-loco aesthetics AND inside cylinders and outside valve gear. 

 

A diagram appears in E.S. Cox's Locomotive Panorama, Volume 1.  It looks ok to me: heavily influenced by US practice as was fashionable on the LMS at the time, with bar frames and what appears to be a wide firebox.  Outside return cranks are a sensible alternative to eccentrics on the driving axle.  There's no reason to suppose it wouldn't have worked but quite why the LMS would have wanted a modernised 2F as opposed to a completely modern 2MT is not clear and I doubt there was ever a serious likelihood of it being built.

 

I'm quite puzzled as to why it offends you so much if you like the Q1.  I suspect if it had gone into service it might now be considered quite cute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

A diagram appears in E.S. Cox's Locomotive Panorama, Volume 1.  It looks ok to me: heavily influenced by US practice as was fashionable on the LMS at the time, with bar frames and what appears to be a wide firebox.  Outside return cranks are a sensible alternative to eccentrics on the driving axle.  There's no reason to suppose it wouldn't have worked but quite why the LMS would have wanted a modernised 2F as opposed to a completely modern 2MT is not clear and I doubt there was ever a serious likelihood of it being built.

 

I'm quite puzzled as to why it offends you so much if you like the Q1.  I suspect if it had gone into service it might now be considered quite cute.

 

US practice at the time, was things like the US Dock Tank. The Americans had long abandoned inside cylinders and developed the technology to cast frame beds, which we never learnt to do. European designers had experimented with inside cylinders and outside valve gear, and given it up. The wide firebox serves no useful purpose on such a small loco, and the Q1 (and for that matter, the Hunslet Austerity 0-6-0ST)  managed perfectly well without such a feature.

 

That’s why....

 

As you rightly say, it serves no useful purpose anyway. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/10/2020 at 21:57, pH said:


Still in operation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_cable_car_system

 

An example in the UK was the original Glasgow subway, later converted to electric motors on the trains:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Subway

 

Not to mention the cable railway that replaced the MagLev at Birmingham International

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/11/2020 at 11:05, Flying Pig said:

 

A diagram appears in E.S. Cox's Locomotive Panorama, Volume 1.  It looks ok to me: heavily influenced by US practice as was fashionable on the LMS at the time, with bar frames and what appears to be a wide firebox.  Outside return cranks are a sensible alternative to eccentrics on the driving axle.  There's no reason to suppose it wouldn't have worked but quite why the LMS would have wanted a modernised 2F as opposed to a completely modern 2MT is not clear and I doubt there was ever a serious likelihood of it being built.

 

I'm quite puzzled as to why it offends you so much if you like the Q1.  I suspect if it had gone into service it might now be considered quite cute.

 

Outside valve gear for inside cylinders wasn’t a new idea, the LNWR experimented with it but didn’t pursue the subject. The Italians built some 2-6-0 like this, and some Central European locomotives used it. It never seemed to establish itself, I suspect that it belongs in that quite large category of ideas which sound good, but don’t really provide any worthwhile benefits compared to the general orthodoxy. 

 

It’s like another American idea not copied in the U.K., the boiler-mounted sand dome. It's a good, workable idea, especially if you are designing locomotives for longer ranges, as most American designs are; but they do presuppose the existence of the necessary infrastructure to fill them quickly and easily. It also requires clearance within the loading gauge for the dome, which is a significant issue with British designs, especially larger ones. 

 

So British locos carried relatively small sandboxes on the running plates or lower frames, where they could be accommodated and filled easily, and carry enough for the required range and climate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I don't think that's all that bad.  Not a thing of beauty perhaps, but the main problem is the scruffiness; that apart, cleaned up it would look quite smart, more practical than stylish but a perfectly respecatable early diesel IMHO, less boxy than some.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2020 at 01:59, The Johnster said:

I don't think that's all that bad.  Not a thing of beauty perhaps, but the main problem is the scruffiness; that apart, cleaned up it would look quite smart, more practical than stylish but a perfectly respecatable early diesel IMHO, less boxy than some.

 

....What he said. OTOH it does illustrate that the “box-cab” genre of early diesel and electric locos, needn’t be mourned unduly; gone, mercifully forgotten and not much missed. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On ‎10‎/‎11‎/‎2020 at 14:41, rockershovel said:

 

It’s like another American idea not copied in the U.K., the boiler-mounted sand dome. It's a good, workable idea, especially if you are designing locomotives for longer ranges, as most American designs are; but they do presuppose the existence of the necessary infrastructure to fill them quickly and easily. It also requires clearance within the loading gauge for the dome, which is a significant issue with British designs, especially larger ones. 

 

So British locos carried relatively small sandboxes on the running plates or lower frames, where they could be accommodated and filled easily, and carry enough for the required range and climate. 

 

The GW Krugers had a boiler-mounted sand box:

 

image.png.e18f9f5d8eb1623e6c41852354ccf096.png

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, 2251 said:

 

The GW Krugers had a boiler-mounted sand box:

 

image.png.e18f9f5d8eb1623e6c41852354ccf096.png

 

45 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

 

Do they did. We also have another candidate, apparently; that’s... not right. 


Standard position for the sand dome on North American steam locomotives:

https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/314266880230844273/

 

It seem to make sense:

- easier and quicker to fill single large container than several small ones (see picture in link)

- storage over a heat source is likely to keep the sand drier, and freer-running

- depends on size of dome, but potential to hold more sand in total than in several small sandboxes

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

True, true.. but it’s like those Belgian locos with the huge square chimneys, who thought those were a good idea? The whole loco appears to have been designed in the dark, especially as it’s from the GWR which overall, had a keen eye for balance, style and continuity of development 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 15/03/2020 at 18:52, gordon s said:

Does this qualify?

 

IMG_6823.jpg.72f27f1eae01dc79c9ffb65630e2c773.jpg

 cannot agree to most of the comments. I consider that as one of the most elegant locomotives - a masterpiece of Carl Goelsdorf. And I paid a lot of money for my H0 copy.  Here it is with it's original number, already under steam for a special train (fathers day) in 2018. Photo taken at Railway Museum Strasshof/ Austria The train went on the 10th of June from Vienna to Murzzuschlag crossing the Semmering pass (3232 feet above sea level), so the old lady had something to work on. 

42008495724_ac6ea16ac5_h.jpg20180609_164828 by Gerhard Novak, on Flickr

 

The cab is not too clean, but this machine is in mainline running condition, they have added the indusi signal detection system to allow it running on the mainlines without another locomotive in front.

 

27857376377_b6789906cd_h.jpg20180609_152958 by Gerhard Novak, on Flickr

Edited by Vecchio
second photo didn't come up
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Central European locomotives definitely have an aesthetic. It’s not like the French style, which is sufficiently akin to the British style that appreciation carries across, and it’s different from the American “frontier” style, designed around rugged construction and limited availability of skilled labour. But, it’s definitely there. 

 

 

Edited by rockershovel
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if this is ugly or just weird

536267236_voiturevapeurAHdwgedited2crop.jpg.0eb998f59d1ad30f9ea04de59f8d4caa.jpg

It's a double deck steam railcar of which two were built for the French Chemin de Fer de l'Etat by Fives-Lille in 1880

 

The purpose of these prototype railcars was to enable the railway to provide all the services required in their concession (usually three return journeys a day) on lightly used local serrvices with a single vehicle. In those days there was a requirement for all three classes to be accomodated, for a separation between the locomotive and the passenger accomodation (usually met on conventional trains with a baggage car)  and the post had to be accompanied by a postman.

 

So behind the engine and boiler (which had return tubes enabling the smoke box to be above the firebox -a common arrangement in ships and stationary boilers) there was a baggage compartment,  a conventional second class compartment with lightly padded bench seats for ten passengers followed by a coupé or half compartment with a single bench seat that could either seat five more second class passengers or the accompanied post (probably on just one of the daily services) and finally a first class coupé whose four heavily padded seats offered generous leg room but faced a blank wall.  On the upper deck reached by stairs from each side was a saloon with twenty four wooden third class seats. Such coaches, known as "Imperiales", were used on a number of French railways sometimes to increase the capacity of busy suburban services but also to make economies by reducing the tare weight per passenger, so allowing a less powerful and cheaper loco to be used. In this case they essentially lengthened a type of Impériale  coach used by the Etat's railways in the Vendée, left out one compartment and an end platform  and replaced it with the driving end of a tram loco with a single driving wheel and inside cylinders and valve gear.

 

1369179142_EtatautomotiricevapeurimperialRevueGeneralsideintv4.jpg.2cc8fcadcb9a703de6a5c4caac4ddfba.jpg

 

From 1880, for very light trains (trains léger), railways could get a dispensation  to reduce the normal mimimum crew of three (driver, fireman and guard) to a driver and guard provided that the guard could stop the train if the driver became incapacitated and have access to the footplate to assist the driver. Presumably in this vehicle the guard simply rode on the footplate but the Etat did also produce some very strange tank locos lengthened to include a small guards/baggage compartment behind the cab.

 

1145013902_AutomotriceVapeurEtat(endviewsext).jpg.24ec00b0528b7bf93fa72c493de73762.jpg

 

In the end these vehicles were not a sucess. They proved expensive to maintain and rather unreliable while their passengers found the oscillation and vibration from the rigidly mounted steam engine very uncomfortable. One  was based at Chartres working local trains to Auneau and the other operated routes from Saintes to Coutras and to La Roche-sur-Yon. Though they were in service for just over a decade there don't appear to be any photographs. Quite possibly the Etat simply wanted to forget that they’d ever built the wretched things. 

The drawings are based on contemporary detailed but rather distorted diagrams scanned from the Revue General des Chemins  fe Fer in 1881. 

 

 The long defunct Baby Trains company (who despite the name produced a range of good scale models) did produce a model of it but rather different from the drawings and I suspect based on existing mouldings  (there appear to be vestigial doors in the upper saloon, the roof shape is wrong and the coaches they were based on all had smooth sided upper saloons, the driven wheel also appears to be the same size as the carrying wheels.)

664181BabyTrainsautomotricevapeurimpriale630.jpg.d13e7d01392c5e82f9b3ceacf92d7ac9.jpg

Though I doubt if the actual vehicle would have had compartment windows in the baggage compartment I think that would have been the full height of the vehicle, as in the drawings, in order to provide the required barrier between engine and passengers and the front end wall of the baggage compartment was unusually thick .

 

 

 

 

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
18 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

I'm not sure if this is ugly or just weird

536267236_voiturevapeurAHdwgedited2crop.jpg.0eb998f59d1ad30f9ea04de59f8d4caa.jpg

It's a double deck steam railcar of which two were built for the French Chemin de Fer de l'Etat by Fives-Lille in 1880

 

The purpose of these prototype railcars was to enable the railway to provide all the services required in their concession (usually three return journeys a day) on lightly used local serrvices with a single vehicle. In those days there was a requirement for all three classes to be accomodated, for a separation between the locomotive and the passenger accomodation (usually met on conventional trains with a baggage car)  and the post had to be accompanied by a postman.

 

So behind the engine and boiler (which had return tubes enabling the smoke box to be above the firebox -a common arrangement in ships and stationary boilers) there was a baggage compartment,  a conventional second class compartment with lightly padded bench seats for ten passengers followed by a coupé or half compartment with a single bench seat that could either seat five more second class passengers or the accompanied post (probably on just one of the daily services) and finally a first class coupé whose four heavily padded seats offered generous leg room but faced a blank wall.  On the upper deck reached by stairs from each side was a saloon with twenty four wooden third class seats. Such coaches, known as "Imperiales", were used on a number of French railways sometimes to increase the capacity of busy suburban services but also to make economies by reducing the tare weight per passenger, so allowing a less powerful and cheaper loco to be used. In this case they essentially lengthened a type of Impériale  coach used by the Etat's railways in the Vendée, left out one compartment and an end platform  and replaced it with the driving end of a tram loco with a single driving wheel and inside cylinders and valve gear.

 

1369179142_EtatautomotiricevapeurimperialRevueGeneralsideintv4.jpg.2cc8fcadcb9a703de6a5c4caac4ddfba.jpg

 

From 1880, for very light trains (trains léger), railways could get a dispensation  to reduce the normal mimimum crew of three (driver, fireman and guard) to a driver and guard provided that the guard could stop the train if the driver became incapacitated and have access to the footplate to assist the driver. Presumably in this vehicle the guard simply rode on the footplate but the Etat did also produce some very strange tank locos lengthened to include a small guards/baggage compartment behind the cab.

 

1145013902_AutomotriceVapeurEtat(endviewsext).jpg.24ec00b0528b7bf93fa72c493de73762.jpg

 

In the end these vehicles were not a sucess. They proved expensive to maintain and rather unreliable while their passengers found the oscillation and vibration from the rigidly mounted steam engine very uncomfortable. One  was based at Chartres working local trains to Auneau and the other operated routes from Saintes to Coutras and to La Roche-sur-Yon. Though they were in service for just over a decade there don't appear to be any photographs. Quite possibly the Etat simply wanted to forget that they’d ever built the wretched things. 

The drawings are based on contemporary detailed but rather distorted diagrams scanned from the Revue General des Chemins  fe Fer in 1881. 

 

 The long defunct Baby Trains company (who despite the name produced a range of good scale models) did produce a model of it but rather different from the drawings and I suspect based on existing mouldings  (there appear to be vestigial doors in the upper saloon, the roof shape is wrong and the coaches they were based on all had smooth sided upper saloons, the driven wheel also appears to be the same size as the carrying wheels.)

664181BabyTrainsautomotricevapeurimpriale630.jpg.d13e7d01392c5e82f9b3ceacf92d7ac9.jpg

Though I doubt if the actual vehicle would have had compartment windows in the baggage compartment I think that would have been the full height of the vehicle, as in the drawings, in order to provide the required barrier between engine and passengers and the front end wall of the baggage compartment was unusually thick .

 

 

 

 

 

Very similar units worked on the Ceinture and there are photos of those. As well as a parcels compartment, there was a dog kennel.

 

PS: Never occurred to me before to wonder whether these had to be turned or if they were allowed to be driven with the passengers "forward".

Edited by Joseph_Pestell
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

I'm not sure if this is ugly or just weird

536267236_voiturevapeurAHdwgedited2crop.jpg.0eb998f59d1ad30f9ea04de59f8d4caa.jpg

It's a double deck steam railcar of which two were built for the French Chemin de Fer de l'Etat by Fives-Lille in 1880

 

The purpose of these prototype railcars was to enable the railway to provide all the services required in their concession (usually three return journeys a day) on lightly used local serrvices with a single vehicle. In those days there was a requirement for all three classes to be accomodated, for a separation between the locomotive and the passenger accomodation (usually met on conventional trains with a baggage car)  and the post had to be accompanied by a postman.

 

So behind the engine and boiler (which had return tubes enabling the smoke box to be above the firebox -a common arrangement in ships and stationary boilers) there was a baggage compartment,  a conventional second class compartment with lightly padded bench seats for ten passengers followed by a coupé or half compartment with a single bench seat that could either seat five more second class passengers or the accompanied post (probably on just one of the daily services) and finally a first class coupé whose four heavily padded seats offered generous leg room but faced a blank wall.  On the upper deck reached by stairs from each side was a saloon with twenty four wooden third class seats. Such coaches, known as "Imperiales", were used on a number of French railways sometimes to increase the capacity of busy suburban services but also to make economies by reducing the tare weight per passenger, so allowing a less powerful and cheaper loco to be used. In this case they essentially lengthened a type of Impériale  coach used by the Etat's railways in the Vendée, left out one compartment and an end platform  and replaced it with the driving end of a tram loco with a single driver.

 

1369179142_EtatautomotiricevapeurimperialRevueGeneralsideintv4.jpg.2cc8fcadcb9a703de6a5c4caac4ddfba.jpg

 

For very light trains (trains léger) railways could get a dispensation  to reduce the normal mimimum crew of three (driver, fireman and guard) to a driver and gaurd provided that the guard could stop the train if the driver became incapacitated and have access to the footplate to assist the driver. Presumably in this vehicle the guard simply rode on the footplate but the Etat did later produce some very strange tank locos that included a guards/baggage compartment behind the cab.

 

In the end these vehicles were not a great sucess. They proved expensive to maintain and rather unreliable while their passengers found the oscillation and vibration from the rigidly mounted steam engine very uncomfortable. One  was based at Chartres working local trains to Auneau and the other operated routes from Saintes to Coutras and to La Roche-sur-Yon. Though they were in service about a decade there don't appear to be any photographs. Quite possibly the Etat simply wanted to forget that they’d ever built the wretched things. 

The drawings are based on contemporary detailed but rather distorted diagrams scanned from the Revue General des Chemins  fe Fer in 1881. 

 

 The long defunct Baby Trains company (who despite the name produced a range of good scale models) did produce a model of it but rather different from the drawings and I suspect based on existing mouldings rather than any greater prototype knowledge.

664181BabyTrainsautomotricevapeurimpriale630.jpg.d13e7d01392c5e82f9b3ceacf92d7ac9.jpg

Though I doubt if the actual vehicle would have had compartment windows in the baggage compartment but I think that would have been the full height of the vehicle to provide the required barrier between engine and passengers and the front end wall of the baggage compartment was unusually thick .

 

 

 

 

 

So... is that some sort of flexible wheelbase, like a Cleminson? How do you describe it - 0-2-(2-2)? A-1-1?

 

It is definitely in the Steampunk style. The dog kennel sounds a worthwhile addition, perhaps accompanied by a rack for goggles, stray gearwheels, armoured tophats and fireproof umbrellas. 

Edited by rockershovel
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

 

So... is that some sort of flexible wheelbase, like a Cleminson? How do you describe it - 0-2-(2-2)? A-1-1?

 

I don't think that they had any mechanism. Indeed it could be a reason why they did not succeed.

 

If I were building a model, I think that I would cheat by using a motor bogie of some sort under the passenger compartments and giving plenty of sideplay to the freewheeling loco axle.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...