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

[Crisis Rail]

1 hour ago, whart57 said:

I would nominate James Stirling's F class 4-4-0 on the South Eastern Railway.

 

 

The wheels look far too big for either the superstructure or the wheelbase, the cab looks like it should be on a different engine (Stirling cabs look fine on smaller engines like the O class), in fact the whole thing looks like Stirling told the draughtsman to use standard components and make them fit.

 

They were decent engines for their time though, and aesthetically speaking were much improved when Wainwright got hold of them and made them look like the D class' matronly elder sister.

 

I agree - that double chimney over the cab  - what were they thinking about?

[Retro_man]

The GWR streamlined Castle takes some beating IMHO :-)

 

 

 

[pH]

2 hours ago, whart57 said:

I would nominate James Stirling's F class 4-4-0 on the South Eastern Railway.

 

 

 

Calling a James Stirling engine 'ugly'? - that's fightin' talk, sir!

 

Or - it just goes to show people have different tastes.

[Mel_H]

On 16/03/2020 at 23:11, DavidB-AU said:

If an EMU was a 14th century plague doctor...

 

Let us not forget the 'Battersea Bullet' - which never made it off the drawing board (in 1987), to whisk people to the theme park, that was being built inside the former Battersea Power station.

 

Designated Class 447 and branded the Battersea Bullet, three 4-car EMUs were to be built and owned by the operator of the entertainment complex. BR allocated carriage numbers 99469-99481 from the private owner carriage series. (Younger readers; this was 10 years before privatisation).

 

The high-speed, bright yellow and red non-stop train would take visitors from platform one at Victoria Station straight to the park. The idea was to have the windows masked with LCD screens, which would give the illusion that the train was travelling at the speed of light, while uniformed attendants served futuristic food and drink – well, it was the 1980s"

 

It's testament to developer John Broome's ambition that he took out a 99-year lease on platform one at Victoria station. Any other platform just wouldn't have been special enough....

 

Read more here - an article by John Broome's son:

 

https://www.londonlaunch.com/be-inspired/battersea-power-station-the-lost-plans/

 

and at 

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/bnkpj5/battersea-power-station-theme-park

 

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Mel_H
updated

[Mel_H]

And, before I forget, here's a visual for the Heathrow Express trains, when it was all funky and going to ultimately be two lines (the second going to St Pancras for people coming from the north - way before Eurostar was ever planned to go there - a plan that was quietly dropped around the time of privatisation).

 

So, here's what was shown in the presentation, and then what we ended up with (Class 332).

 

[Sorry, OT now; just my OCD kicked in!]

[Ravenser]

Not mentioned - but surely a respectable candidate : the GER T19R "Humpty Dumpty" 2-4-0s . A very ill proportioned loco, rebuilt from a rather elegant one...   Photos seem rare T19 + T19R

[Mel_H]

Finally, may I nominate Austrian Federal Railways BBÖ class 80. And, it's already been modelled. Who needs SteamPunk!

[The Johnster]

Madre de dios!

[ColinK]

That really is grim. What’s the equipment on the top for?

[newbryford]

7 minutes ago, ColinK said:

That really is grim. What’s the equipment on the top for?

 

Scooping up toilet rolls?

[The Johnster]

Diverting your attention from how ugly the rest of it is?  Even the Belgians never made anything like that, though I suspect they wanted to...

[melmerby]

22 minutes ago, ColinK said:

That really is grim. What’s the equipment on the top for?

I reckon it's an air-conditioning unit for the crew

[DavidB-AU]

80.4911 was a one off with an experimental flue gas water preheater. It was nicknamed "Lautsprecher" (loudspeaker).

 

Cheers

David

[Reorte]

On 19/03/2020 at 00:18, 43110andyb said:

 

One more candidate for a 3 horse race!

Is that why it's wearing a horse collar?

[Niels]

7 hours ago, DavidB-AU said:

80.4911 was a one off with an experimental flue gas water preheater. It was nicknamed "Lautsprecher" (loudspeaker).

Cheers

David

 

It was a Ljungstrom rotating air preheater taking heat from exhaust mixture,storing it in a ceramic matrix and then give it back to fresh air intended to go under the grate for coal.The ceramics tolerate liquid sulphuric acid,so the scheme is not such a dead end as the ten Crosti BR9Fs.And is not much uglier.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Niels

[Niels]

23 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Can any aerodynamicists explain to me why no attempt is made to streamline half these units ? Surely you’d gain reduced fuel burn by not having a completely flat front end ?

 

 

Trains are long things and air resistance comes from total air-wetted areas.The DSB environment boss once stated that fuel consumption per unit was unchanged wheter  one ,two or three were coupled up.

The main air restance from steam locomotives comes from driver spokes when going fast.

Streamline locomotives below 75mph are marketing stunts making maintenance difficult.

[Niels]

On 18/03/2020 at 23:13, eastglosmog said:

Where did that story come from?  The Experiments had larger wheels, longer wheelbase and a bigger boiler, a totally different locomotive even if they incorporated some parts (shades of rebuilding Claughtons into Patriots).  They also looked heaps better!

 

Mr Nock was responsible for a lot of words.

His stories about Whale making locomotives look suspect to my eyes.

In Edward Talbots book page 199 there is a weigth diagram signed by Whale august 05 showing Bill Bailey.

First picture of Whale experiment was taken june 05.They knew each other.

For my eyes it is evident that Experiments were streched Bill Baileys.

Remove outside cylinders(This removes more than half the load on the inside Joy gear.It must have been extremely troublesome at speed and Whale was responsible for maintenance).

The geometry between inside cylinders and crankshaft and boggie is almost unchanged.

Six feet drivers is better than five on a two cylinder locomotive going fast so the plain driver shafts have to be put a little aft.The saved mass can be used for a bigger boiler and that is a nice thing.

 Experiments were not rebuilds but family.

 

Edited March 20, 2020 by Niels

[Niels]

Talbot on page 246 repeats the Nock Precursor nonsense of Whale being ordered to make it a mixture of Jumbo and Caulifloors.

Whale used the Alfred the Great class as model.No outside cylinders,bigger boiler and better cab.

He later modified some of the Alfreds this way but  stopped when they were not asked to run fast.

At slow speed a compound is often more frugal than a simple.

Edited March 20, 2020 by Niels

[eldomtom2]

On 16/03/2020 at 23:11, DavidB-AU said:

If an EMU was a 14th century plague doctor...

It won an award if you can believe it, which I suppose is to be expected when it's designed by an architect (it is allegedly retrofuturistic). The Japanese do seem to have somewhat of a knack for uniquely ugly EMUs...

Edited March 20, 2020 by eldomtom2

[Nick Holliday]

5 hours ago, Niels said:

 

Mr Nock was responsible for a lot of words.

His stories about Whale making locomotives look suspect to my eyes.

In Edward Talbots book page 199 there is a weigth diagram signed by Whale august 05 showing Bill Bailey.

First picture of Whale experiment was taken june 05.They knew each other.

For my eyes it is evident that Experiments were streched Bill Baileys.

Remove outside cylinders(This removes more than half the load on the inside Joy gear.It must have been extremely troublesome at speed and Whale was responsible for maintenance).

The geometry between inside cylinders and crankshaft and boggie is almost unchanged.

Six feet drivers is better than five on a two cylinder locomotive going fast so the plain driver shafts have to be put a little aft.The saved mass can be used for a bigger boiler and that is a nice thing.

 Experiments were not rebuilds but family.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "They knew each other." As with many railway companies there was a degree of continuity in the outward appearance, at least, of their locomotives. If you go back to Ramsbottom's Sampson and DX  classes you can see a gradual progression all the way through to the Claughtons. Sometimes a new broom, especially if they have come from a different company, will bring in sweeping changes, such as Churchward did on the GWR, but this didn't happen on the LNWR.

Can you explain the logic behind the plain driver shafts having to be put a little aft, and how that saved mass, not that weight was a great consideration as improved track usually allowed greater axle loadings?

As you say the Expriments were totally new builds, so no need to draw too many parallels with the Bill Baileys, which were intended for a different function anyway - comparison with the 19in Goods might be more relevant.

4 hours ago, Niels said:

Talbot on page 246 repeats the Nock Precursor nonsense of Whale being ordered to make it a mixture of Jumbo and Caulifloors.

Whale used the Alfred the Great class as model.No outside cylinders,bigger boiler and better cab.

He later modified some of the Alfreds this way but  stopped when they were not asked to run fast.

At slow speed a compound is often more frugal than a simple.

I think you have misinterpreted Talbot's comments. He merely says "Though typically North Western in general appearance, it seemed outwardly quite different from anything that had gone before but in fact could be regarded as a logical development from the 'Jumbos' and 'Cauliflowers'." This is just an observation, with no mention of being ordered to combine the two. As I said above, the Precursors and Experiments were, visibly, an obvious progression from some of the earliest LNWR designs. Whale didn't need to use the Alfreds as a model, the various elements would naturally fall into place, bearing in mind the wheels were one foot smaller in diameter too.

As for the reconstruction of the Alfreds, the initial modifications he made were instigated by Webb and mainly involved the use of independent Joy valve gear to the outside cylinders, creating the Benbow class. The later modifications involved the removal of the outside cylinders, and admittedly Whale didn't create many of these Renowns in his brief period of office, and all of these were from the earlier Jubilee class; this may well have been because he had sufficient new engines built, and the Jubilees, Alfeds and Benbows were reasonably successful, not demanding attention until they were due a major refit, after around seventeen years of service. His successor, Bowen-Cooke, decided the rebuilding was worthwhile, and ultimately 70 out of the 80 Jubilees and Benbows were so treated.

Since compounding was tried out on both goods and passenger classes, I suspect that, correctly proportioned, compounding resulted in fuel savings over a wide range of speeds. Given that compounding seemed to survive longer on express passenger locos, such as the Midland compounds, that would tend to suggest they were even more economic at speed, when the relationship between high and low pressure cylinders was at its optimum. Compounding was generally abandoned because of the higher maintenance costs, outweighing the operating efficiencies.

[melmerby]

More Nipponese kitsch:

 

 

[MJI]

The Deltic is a member of could be ugly but is not, it reminds me styling wise of the 1950s US locos which to be honest were quite snazzy.

[Crisis Rail]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

More Nipponese kitsch:

 

 

 

 

Such inspiration.

 

[Ramblin Rich]

3 hours ago, eldomtom2 said:

It won an award if you can believe it, which I suppose is to be expected when it's designed by an architect (it is allegedly retrofuturistic). The Japanese do seem to have somewhat of a knack for uniquely ugly EMUs...

That is definitely a Ford Transit radiator grille

[russ p]

3 hours ago, melmerby said:

More Nipponese kitsch:

 

 

 

Why does this have a space invaders game on the nose end?