rockershovel Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 ... well, I rather like Crocodiles. I’m surprised this thread has got this far without mentioning the Flamme 4-6-2s, classic examples of the European “The bits won’t fit together any other way” school of design 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted June 18, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 18, 2020 I'd say weird rather than ugly, and certainly badly proportioned. I can't see why the running plate extends so far ahead of the outside cylinders unless the inside ones drive the leading axle de Glehn style, and even if they do about the frames and front bogie can be shortened by 5 or 6 feet. The odd shaped firebox I cannot comment on as I don't know what the blocks in the tender are, but I highly approve of what even 110 years on looks like a futuristic cab! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 Boiler too small ahead of the firebox IMO. It's like someone has put a Maunsell 2-6-0 boiler on a Princess. Jason 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Johnster said: I'd say weird rather than ugly, and certainly badly proportioned. I can't see why the running plate extends so far ahead of the outside cylinders unless the inside ones drive the leading axle de Glehn style, and even if they do about the frames and front bogie can be shortened by 5 or 6 feet. The odd shaped firebox I cannot comment on as I don't know what the blocks in the tender are, but I highly approve of what even 110 years on looks like a futuristic cab! Seems to be a demonstration of the pitfalls of combining sub-assemblies which worked well enough in their original uses.... the boiler was apparently a great success as a fast freight 2-10-0, the inspiration for the fabled L&YR 2-10-0 design. appearances notwithstanding, they seemed to have been powerful and free-steaming, and had a long career in their original routes The blocks in the tender would be briquettes, compressed coal dust and slack. Edited June 18, 2020 by rockershovel 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium figworthy Posted June 18, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 18, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, rockershovel said: I’m surprised this thread has got this far without mentioning the Flamme 4-6-2s, classic examples of the European “The bits won’t fit together any other way” school of design Mind bleach required. That thing makes a Thompson pacific look "right" Adrian Edited June 18, 2020 by figworthy 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold rodent279 Posted June 18, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 18, 2020 1 hour ago, rockershovel said: Seems to be a demonstration of the pitfalls of combining sub-assemblies which worked well enough in their original uses.... the boiler was apparently a great success as a fast freight 2-10-0, the inspiration for the fabled L&YR 2-10-0 design. appearances notwithstanding, they seemed to have been powerful and free-steaming, and had a long career in their original routes The blocks in the tender would be briquettes, compressed coal dust and slack. I suppose that makes them the antidote to the "if it looks right, it is right" theory. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 Weirdly, the smokebox front with with its wingplates looks like a crib from the Caledonian railway designs the Belgians bought a few years previously. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
88D Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Does anybody think the Lanky class 30 and 31s are well proportioned/ good looking/ dreadful? I think the latter, but don’t seem able to drag a photo here to prove the point. There was also a tank version of these, which was even worse! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brack Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 20 hours ago, pete_mcfarlane said: Weirdly, the smokebox front with with its wingplates looks like a crib from the Caledonian railway designs the Belgians bought a few years previously. I cant decide whether the smoke deflectors make it worse or better. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brack Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 28 minutes ago, 88D said: Does anybody think the Lanky class 30 and 31s are well proportioned/ good looking/ dreadful? Ugly, ungainly things, boiler too high and they look like they're about to tip forwards. The 32 is slightly less bad as the cab/bunker visually helps balance it a bit more, but the whole lot of them are hideous. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Nowt wrong with them. They would pull a shed down. Photo Ben Brooksbank via Wiki Jason 8 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westerner Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 I do like an ugly loco. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcm@gwr Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: Nowt wrong with them. They would pull a shed down. Photo Ben Brooksbank via Wiki Jason Thread title? Worst looking locomotive! Nobody said anything about performance, or capability! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brack Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 080s in general are rather ungainly things, Robinson and Raven managed to make theirs look decent, but most of the others in this country weren't exactly aesthetically pleasing. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 I declare the winner to be bullet-nosed Castles and Kings. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 43 minutes ago, jcm@gwr said: Thread title? Worst looking locomotive! Nobody said anything about performance, or capability! So why are they being mentioned? I don't think the L&Y had anything remotely in the category "worst" anything. Jason 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
runs as required Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) From my (clearly eccentric Asberger’s ?) personal Point of View, I suggest this thread's conservative middle of the road boring ‘keep it all properly clad beauty’ Brit inside cylinder 4-4-0 paradigm against which all are judged, is well overdue being renamed: 'Exceptional "Thinking Outside the Box" Locomotives Most Worth Scratch Modelling” Edited June 20, 2020 by runs as required formatting 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 On 18/06/2020 at 20:01, rockershovel said: ... well, I rather like Crocodiles. I’m surprised this thread has got this far without mentioning the Flamme 4-6-2s, classic examples of the European “The bits won’t fit together any other way” school of design When it came to adding the boiler, they said "Measure twice, cut once", but the apprentice they engaged didn't listen. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcm@gwr Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 5 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: So why are they being mentioned? I don't think the L&Y had anything remotely in the category "worst" anything. Jason Don't ask me, I didn't say anything about their looks, just saying that their ability to do things is not relevant to their looks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold rodent279 Posted June 20, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, jcm@gwr said: Don't ask me, I didn't say anything about their looks, just saying that their ability to do things is not relevant to their looks! I suppose the flip side of the coin would be locomotives that look fine, but failed to live up to expectations. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted June 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 20, 2020 14 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: So why are they being mentioned? I don't think the L&Y had anything remotely in the category "worst" anything. Jason Wasn't the locomotive situation on the L&YR pretty dire, until Barton Wright took over in 1875? It desperately need new locomotives and new workshops to build them in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted June 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 20, 2020 14 hours ago, robmcg said: I declare the winner to be bullet-nosed Castles and Kings. Standard locos, with clown noses? Plenty of worse examples than Castles & Kings, within this topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted June 20, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted June 20, 2020 8 hours ago, rodent279 said: I suppose the flip side of the coin would be locomotives that look fine, but failed to live up to expectations. Like Churchward Counties? Or the magnificently mad Harrison Hurricane? Or the entire 1955 Modernisation Scheme? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brack Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, The Johnster said: Or the entire 1955 Modernisation Scheme? I wouldnt have said that the D5700s "look fine" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcm@gwr Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 3 hours ago, The Johnster said: Like Churchward Counties? Or the magnificently mad Harrison Hurricane? Or the entire 1955 Modernisation Scheme? Surely you mean Hawksworth Counties? 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