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 Gold
10 hours ago, Adam88 said:

Have we had this one yet?

 

By Unknown author - old image, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=24457432

 

image.png.aed7bf9b565b7c4d659546072f29130f.png

 

We have a winner -

- in the "For shear shock value" category!

 

 

That is truly the awfulest thing on rails I have seen.

 

 

Kev.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

French railways were fairly obsessive about reducing coal consumption because decent steam coal  was fairly absent from their coalfields and much of it was imported from South Wales making it relatiively more expensive.

 

Few countries had their own decent steam coal. But each found different ways of dealing with the situation. The Americans for example built locomotives with huge fireboxes into which they could chuck any old crap they had to hand. The Dutch and Swiss went big on electrification. And then there was oil, either burned in converted steam locomotive or used as fuel in internal combustion engines.

 

It's a measure of the conservatism of railway engineers that the diesel pioneers of the pre-war years were found in odd places. Thailand was a diesel pioneer, replacing steam with diesel on its main expresses in the early 1930s. And buying the locos to do that with from Denmark. Meanwhile in the traditional leaders of railway technology designers and engineers were still trying to build better steam engines.

 

It's ironic then that the final hurrah of steam came as a result of the chaos of WW2 and steam power was chosen to rebuild the railways because it wasn't state of the art rather than it was. The post war steam locomotives were mostly simple designs that could be built quickly by non-specialist builders with poor materials.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, whart57 said:

 

Few countries had their own decent steam coal. But each found different ways of dealing with the situation. The Americans for example built locomotives with huge fireboxes into which they could chuck any old crap they had to hand. The Dutch and Swiss went big on electrification. And then there was oil, either burned in converted steam locomotive or used as fuel in internal combustion engines.

 

It's a measure of the conservatism of railway engineers that the diesel pioneers of the pre-war years were found in odd places. Thailand was a diesel pioneer, replacing steam with diesel on its main expresses in the early 1930s. And buying the locos to do that with from Denmark. Meanwhile in the traditional leaders of railway technology designers and engineers were still trying to build better steam engines.

 

It's ironic then that the final hurrah of steam came as a result of the chaos of WW2 and steam power was chosen to rebuild the railways because it wasn't state of the art rather than it was. The post war steam locomotives were mostly simple designs that could be built quickly by non-specialist builders with poor materials.

French steam locos burnt a mixture of steam coal, other coal and patent briquettes - coal dust mixed with clay- but the proportions depended on the company (and its geographical positon) and that did affect the design of fireboxes. Generally speaking they didn't have as much coal of any sort as countries like Britain and Germany (and the USA?) so saving fuel always was a priority.

SNCF's original plan seems to have been to gradually  replace steam with electricity across the network, not least because, post-war,  coal was in high demand for iron and steel production as well as for electrical generation so was expensive, but the development of diesel technology did throw a bit of a spanner into that.

Ralways with access to hydro electricity, such as Switzerland and the French C.F. du Midi, went for electrification well before the war.

Chapelon - who was no great fan of streamlining- did try to demonstrate that the transmission losses from electricity generated at the coal fields were greater than the amount of coal needed for steam locos to transport it to where the electricity was needed for local power generation but I suspect that developments in very high voltage transmission would have changed that balance, probably to the benefit of air quality in Paris! (Coal powered power stations in London were ISTR one of the reasons thought to account for the deadliness of the capital's post-war smogs as were the replacement of electric trams and trolleybuses by buses)

France is of course a much larger country than Britain so, apart from the cost of coal itself,  the costs of shipping it to parts of the network far from the major coalfields did lead to perhaps half of the vast total of North American  built 141Rs  being supplied to run on heavy oil (far heavier than diesel oil) which was a fairly cheap fuel . Oil burners also had a longer range between refuelling.  

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

North American  built 141Rs  being supplied to run on heavy oil (far heavier than diesel oil) which was a fairly cheap fuel . Oil burners also had a longer range between refuelling.  

 

Truly filthy stuff and so sticky that the tender had to have a heating system for the oil to be able to flow from tender to firebox.

 

The quantity of soot produced was such as to clog up the boiler steam pipes very quickly (about 50km IIRC). At that point, the fireman would shovel in some sand which would scour out the pipes and create the most awful black smoke from the chimney.

 

Nice thing about the oil-fired locos is plenty of space on the footplate for gricers. I was on the footplate as we passed Port-la-Nouvelle and the fireman carried out this action. Some local ladies who had their washing out can not have been happy.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DavidB-AU said:

 

640px-Class_141_at_Weardale_Railway.jpg

 

Nothing wrong with that. It's a design classic which has lasted for decades and will be used on heritage railways for decades to come. In the history of Britain's railways it'll be as relevant as Rocket and Mallard.

 

I notice those that criticise the Pacers never actually travel on them...

 

 

 

Jason

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, SHMD said:

 

We have a winner -

- in the "For shear shock value" category!

 

 

That is truly the awfulest thing on rails I have seen.

 

 

Kev.

There is a point at which ugliness transcends itself and becomes a new type of beauty.  This thing has passed that point.  Twice. 
 

It’s a very Bulleid looking tender, though, isn’t it?

 

 

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Johnster said:

There is a point at which ugliness transcends itself and becomes a new type of beauty.  This thing has passed that point.  Twice. 
 

It’s a very Bulleid looking tender, though, isn’t it?

 

 

Yet why do we find a common or garden steam locomotive elegant? With all those chunks of metal thrashing around their movement is more like insects than mammals or birds and hardly an image of effortless power.  Their beauty must come from what we associate them with. I find Mallard far less attractrive than a GW Castle yet in aesthetic terms its smooth lines ought to make it the other way round.

I'm not sure if beauty is something anyone would associate with a steam loco if they met it for the first time and had no idea what it was.

So do things like the Etat 230-800 appear ungainly to us (it certainly does to me) because they're so different from how we expect a steam loco to look. That was of course half the point of a lot of streamline designs, to look sleek and modern and not a bit like "old fashioned" steam locos of the past fifty years. 

Personally I have since childhood thought this, the M1000 from 1934,  to be about the ugliest thing I'd ever seen on steel rails.

Union_Pacific_City_of_Salina.JPG.0eac23bbcd42c5622014222641ae26da.JPG

 

but the UP obviously thought ther petrol-electric loco and train appealing enough to put on a poster.

The alternative was to produce an image of a perfectly conventional loco but stylised to reflect "modern" design

1024284267_NordExpress.jpg.614c1d5a569f0ccd1f03eafff87a8878.jpg

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. Some people don't like German, French etc engines, because to British eyes, they look unnecessary cluttered and fussy. I like them just as much as the sterile, cleaned up lines of 8F's, BR Standards etc. I've always thought 87's never quite looked right without their original MU jumpers, even though the TDM jumpers presented a much cleaner front end.

It's all subjective really.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Nothing wrong with that. It's a design classic which has lasted for decades and will be used on heritage railways for decades to come. In the history of Britain's railways it'll be as relevant as Rocket and Mallard.

 

I notice those that criticise the Pacers never actually travel on them...

 

 

 

Jason

 

They were never intended to last decades though were they?

 

And it seems to me the bulk of those complaining about the Pacers are those who ride on them frequently. It's easy for those of us many miles to the South to regard them as quaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'll just confirm that by saying that I quite like the appearance of a 142. Being southern I never have to travel on them, but in my defense I'm only talking about the styling, not the experience of traveling on them...

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're looking for ungainly looking railcars, this would surely be hard to beat

SNCF_X_5600-FNC.jpg.e97e357eb483a7615074d88f3842bd5d.jpg

The SNCF's X-5600 FNC (Federation National des Cheminots) autorails were designed by a committee (how could we have guessed ?) of management and unions.  The idea was to produce a vehicle that would be simple and light enough to compete against buses with the aim of maintaining or even restoring passenger services on lightly travelled branch lines after the war. 63 were built between 1946 & 1953 and they were withdrawn after a short life between 1960 and 1966.  They  don't seem to have been any more successful than British Railways' railbuses of the late 1950s though at leat SNCF had the sense not to order five different designs from competing manufacturers.  For some reason SNCF seemed to prefer a single raised cab with direct mechanical contol of the gearbox  for all three of its smaller early railcars though the "Mobylette" and "Picasso" were generally a bit more normal looking  .

When I  first saw a photo of one of these I thought it very ungainly, not to say  ugly, but a model,  built from a Keyser white metal kit by the late Andy Hart, now runs on my layout and I rather like it. 

FNC_(Kays)_at_le_Goudron_.jpg.7ef56137bb16c2f78462b4fdd2231845.jpg

_FNC_arrives_le_Goudron.jpg.b0f1c135ec701309316ff7c9914a4041.jpg

 

 

 

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I had a look at a few pictures of streamlined 1930s steam locos, most had an annoyance which slightly spoiled the effect.

 

But among the best looking of them would be the A4.

 

The worst is that weird nose loco a few pages back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 09/04/2020 at 14:39, Pacific231G said:

If you're looking for ungainly looking railcars, this would surely be hard to beat

 

The SNCF's X-5600 FNC (Federation National des Cheminots) autorails were designed by a committee (how could we have guessed ?) of management and unions.  The idea was to produce a vehicle that would be simple and light enough to compete against buses with the aim of maintaining or even restoring passenger services on lightly travelled branch lines after the war. 63 were built between 1946 & 1953 and they were withdrawn after a short life between 1960 and 1966.  They  don't seem to have been any more successful than British Railways' railbuses of the late 1950s though at leat SNCF had the sense not to order five different designs from competing manufacturers.  For some reason SNCF seemed to prefer a single raised cab with direct mechanical contol of the gearbox  for all three of its smaller early railcars though the "Mobylette" and "Picasso" were generally a bit more normal looking  .

When I  first saw a photo of one of these I thought it very ungainly, not to say  ugly, but a model,  built from a Keyser white metal kit by the late Andy Hart, now runs on my layout and I rather like it. 

 

 

Were they driven from the same cab in both directions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

 

Were they driven from the same cab in both directions?

Hi Andy,

Yes. the driver sat sideways facing inwards . Cricked necks must have been an occupatonal hazard.

There is an SNCF film about it here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_u17FxR4Bg

and the full version here shoild you ever acquire one and need to know how to change the oil filter etc.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xc543a

The shepherd driving his flock along the disused railway was poignant but I'd like to know where the MV (mixed train) they used at the beginning was. In those days there were still quite a few SG light railways operated locally though SNCF had closed most such lines of their own to passengers before the war.

 

What these three early autorails cooudn't do was operate in multiple unit. If two of them were "twinned," which was quite common with the Picassos,  then each autorail had to have its own driver. The controls were direct mechanical and on the Picasso the clutch pedal required about a foot of movement.

Edited by Pacific231G
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 09/04/2020 at 14:39, Pacific231G said:

If you're looking for ungainly looking railcars, this would surely be hard to beat

SNCF_X_5600-FNC.jpg.e97e357eb483a7615074d88f3842bd5d.jpg

 

I have always had ambitions to a add afreelanced narrow gauge version of one of these to my fleet.

It could possibly fit onto a bogie chassis.

 

There was, somewhere in one of my books. a photo of an Italian(?) NG railcar that made these look beautiful.

As I recall it had an elevated control tower on top of a central motor compartment which was articulated between two saloons.

The whole thing was, as I recall, arranged in a 1-B-1 formation. 

To copound its ugliness it had fluted stainless steel sides.

 

I may be gone for some time as I try to find a picture.

 

Ian T

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ianathompson said:

 

I have always had ambitions to a add afreelanced narrow gauge version of one of these to my fleet.

It could possibly fit onto a bogie chassis.

 

There was, somewhere in one of my books. a photo of an Italian(?) NG railcar that made these look beautiful.

As I recall it had an elevated control tower on top of a central motor compartment which was articulated between two saloons.

The whole thing was, as I recall, arranged in a 1-B-1 formation. 

To copound its ugliness it had fluted stainless steel sides.

 

I may be gone for some time as I try to find a picture.

 

Ian T

 

If it's as bad as you say, don't hurry back!

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
16 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

 

Were they driven from the same cab in both directions?

 

Yes, it's an odd sensation to drive sidewards.

 

To add to David's comments, worth noting that they were allowed to propel a trailer so long as the cabin was at the right end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/04/2020 at 14:39, Pacific231G said:

If you're looking for ungainly looking railcars, this would surely be hard to beat

SNCF_X_5600-FNC.jpg.e97e357eb483a7615074d88f3842bd5d.jpg

 

 

The people who made the Peel P50 must have nicked the cab design for their car...

 

254239379_1965PeelP50.jpg.0b2b31e6576a7ad345207d02781b27c1.jpg

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_P50

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Hi Andy,

Yes. the driver sat sideways facing inwards . Cricked necks must have been an occupatonal hazard.

There is an SNCF film about it here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_u17FxR4Bg

and the full version here shoild you ever acquire one and need to know how to change the oil filter etc.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xc543a

The shepherd driving his flock along the disused railway was poignant but I'd like to know where the MV (mixed train) they used at the beginning was. In those days there were still quite a few SG light railways operated locally though SNCF had closed most such lines of their own to passengers before the war.

 

What these three early autorails cooudn't do was operate in multiple unit. If two of them were "twinned," which was quite common with the Picassos,  then each autorail had to have its own driver. The controls were direct mechanical and on the Picasso the clutch pedal required about a foot of movement.

 

David,

Going OT but two very characterful films you linked to there. The mixed train has carriages clearly marked BdR (Bouches du Rhone) and the general appearance of the railway would back that up. There is a very brief shot with a station nameboard. A busy network due to the fruit and vegetable production, some of the lines were in use until quite recently and can still be found easily.

First clip has a nice shot of a standard gauge Billard.

Edited by Joseph_Pestell
Add
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

If it's as bad as you say, don't hurry back! jcm@gwr

 

 

Not sure how we go on with copyright on here but the only picture I can pull up on the web comes by typing the following into a search engine.

 

Automotrice M2 serie 100

 

If you the select "images" it is about the fifth along on the top row.

Sorry that I cannot do better than this but I am a modeller not a computer whizz!

 

They ran on the Ferrovie Mediterraneo Calbro Lucane (MCL) system in southern Italy.

Italy in the interwar period is fertile ground for hideous locomotives of all types of propulsion!

 

The units are not quite as bad as I remembered, apart from the "conning tower". At least they avoided the fluted metal sheets of other Italian railcar classes.

Given how flimsy some appeared to be you have to wonder if it really was corrugated iron!

Years ago I considered one of these for the AFK, which as you have probably gathered is a depository for the wierd and wonderful.

 

More details are available in Le Ferrovie Calabro Lucane, S Rognone [No date No publisher info contained in the book] not that I imagine that it was a best seller in Britain!

 

Two more slightly accessible books of the aforesaid wierd and wonderful, which I recommend and went to as first port of call are

 

Diesel Rail Traction, WJK Davies, Almark 1973

 

The Light Railcar in Western Europe, WJK Davies, Plateway Press 2004 (?).

 

Perahaps the most bizarre inhabitant of this latter book is the small 6 wheel railcar from which a minute two wheel portion could be detached. 

(It is run a close second by too many of the other featured inhabitants to mention.)

This was built by HAWA for the CF d'Ardennes in 1932. Unsurprisingly it features in a chapter called "Dead ends"! (Section 9.10)

The net pulls up no pictures of this!

 

Ian T

Edited by ianathompson
Forgot to quote!
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I am shocked, nay horrified. I find people glorifying the uglification of the most beautiful English Electric diesel loco. I suppose the railways saw sense and only bought 22. Had they looked like the original everybody would have been clamouring for some, even the Western. 
 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ianathompson said:

Not sure how we go on with copyright on here but the only picture I can pull up on the web comes by typing the following into a search engine.

 

Automotrice M2 serie 100

 

If you the select "images" it is about the fifth along on the top row.

Sorry that I cannot do better than this but I am a modeller not a computer whizz!

 

 

Is this it?

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/sxCTuXD4B1ytPWQ68

 

 

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...