Why did some diesel classes have noses (37, Deltic, Peaks etc)?

[F-UnitMad]

Well whether diesels had noses or not, one thing does remain constant :-

 

Heljan can't model any of them accurately in 7mm scale.... 🙄🙄🙄

Edited June 14, 2022 by F-UnitMad

[Hal Nail]

6 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

Well whether diesels had noses or not, one thing does remain constant :-

 

Heljan can't model any of them accurately in 7mm scale.... 🙄🙄🙄

Does the fabled 47 shelf count as a nose?!

Edited June 14, 2022 by Hal Nail

[Reorte]

19 hours ago, Morello Cherry said:

It's worth looking at the evolution of ALCOs road switchers which go from low hood to high hood to low front hood as the locos have to become more powerful and as I assume more equipment is added. I am happy to be corrected.

 

RS 1 (1940) - the Rock Island specifically asked for a loco that was powerful enough to haul trains on the mainline but also provided good vision when switching. The Long hood was considered the front.

 

 

OT, but that's a contender for the "When the real thing looks like a model" thread (garden railway in this case).

[Andy Kirkham]

9 hours ago, Reorte said:

OT, but that's a contender for the "When the real thing looks like a model" thread (garden railway in this case).

I honestly thought it was a garden railway.

Edited June 14, 2022 by Andy Kirkham

[Morello Cherry]

Just a thought. Is there anything in Haresnape about the front end design of BR diesels. I had some modern railway articles from c1964 - I think it was a three or four part series and he was looking at the improvements made by the BR design board. I seem to remember a lot about the 52s but there was a lot of discussion of design ideas in the articles. Maybe there is something in there or something in his other writings on diesel design.

Edited June 14, 2022 by Morello Cherry

[jim.snowdon]

41 minutes ago, Morello Cherry said:

Just a thought. Is there anything is Haresnape about the front end design of BR diesels. I had some modern railway articles from c1964 - I think it was a three or four part series and he was looking at the improvements made by the BR design board. I seem to remember a lot about the 52s but there was a lot of discussion of design ideas in the articles. Maybe there is something in there or something in his other writings on diesel design.

BR's Design Panel, under Misha Black certainly had a major impact on the design of British diesel and electric locomotives, along with the efforts of industrial design houses such as Wilkes and Ashmore, but whilst they improved the elegance of the later locomotives they can't be credited with 'noseless' diesel locomotives. Excluding the various Type 1s, apart from the Peaks and their derivatives, which probably owe their looks to the LMS twins, both being designed by Derby as far as the mechanical parts went, locomotives with 'noses' are exclusively English Electric (and not just on BR - EE diesels and electrics for export shared the feature). I have a suspicion that EE would have put noses on their second generation Type 4 (aka the Class 50) had not BR insisted on a flat front design (even if they then adulterated it by requiring the addition of the 4-character headcode box).

 

 

[MikeRich]

On 11/06/2022 at 16:08, Steamport Southport said:

Don't forget the corridors that many of the early diesels had.

 

The LMS Twins for example.

 

https://lms10000.co.uk/

 

 

Jason

There's a drawing taken from an April 1947 LMS magazine at:

 

https://twsmedia.co.uk/towards-nationalisation-transport-act-1947/ (linked because copyright is unclear)

 

showing the original design for the Twins with much lower noses, but full height corridors - they really would have scared the horses! Fortunately, someone decided otherwise.

 

Mike.

[The Johnster]

Not just full height gangways, but apparently compatible with coach gangways; perhaps the LMS was considering crew changes on the move as opposed to pulling up briefly at Upperby for the 'non stop' Euston-Glasgow trains, similar to those carried out on the ECML with the corridor tender pacifics.

 

I rather like the styling of the Ivatt twins, very evocative of the period.  OTOH I find the bulbous proboscis of a Deltic quite hideous; the best thing about Deltics was the noise they made!

[Flying Pig]

13 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

OTOH I find the bulbous proboscis of a Deltic quite hideous; the best thing about Deltics was the noise they made!

 

The Class 55 Deltics were noble looking machines, styled by the fine draughtsmen of EE, but their graceful lines were so nearly marred by outside interference. Brian Haresnape reproduces a pair of sketches made when Roland Bond tried to insist on gangways and the full height version didn't look at all pretty.  Meanwhile the styling consultant, apparently entranced by his new Vauxhall Velox, wanted curved windscreens and forward sloping A pillars (thusly).

[The Johnster]

I'd have to agree that a wrap-around Vauxhall Velox/Hillman Minx windscreen would have not been a good idea on a Deltic; not so bad on a Trans-Pennine dmu or a Glasgow 25kv emu!

 

The two-tone green original livery, with white window surrounds, improved their appearance very considerably, as IMHO did the breaking up of that horrible nose (I had an alcoholic uncle with something very similar, only in bright red) with an syp.  The true horror was revealed by the blue livery and fyp nose, which simply looked (as it did on all engines with noses) as if someone had upended the loco and dipped the noses in the yellow paint.  The original livery was shared with the Hymeks and, without the white window surround, the Baby Deltics, for no obvious reason; there was nothing to connect the locos. 

 

Indeed, the various green era BR diesel liveries never seemed to follow any logic from what I could see; you couldn't associate a particular livery with a power Type, or a purpose, or even a region except perhaps the WR's maroon Warships and Westerns.  If a 40 and 44/5/6 had noses and a white stripe at cantrail level, why didn't a 37?  Why did the skinhead 31s have white window surrounds but not the headcode version?  All other locos in the twin stripe livery had white window surrounds.  What about the D800 Warships, AFAIK the first UK 2-cab diesel loco style to dispense with the gangways.  Do we consider the pregnant look to be a nose?  Another horrible looking engine IMHO.

[97406]

I’m glad the Deltics turned out the way they did rather than the Vauxhall wraparound windscreen job or shark nosed which look very odd to my eyes. The plain Banger Blue livery didn’t do them any favours, but this was relieved with the FP white window surrounds. Similarly GFYE looked OK to me. What would have been nice would have been BR blue, but with a pearl grey lower band and  retaining the white window surrounds. However the blue livery was about functionality and austerity rather than style.

 

I grew up well into the banger blue period in the 70s, and I hold a lot of nostalgia for the livery and the time, but I did welcome the explosion of liveries in the 80s, and chose that period as the main one to model.

 

I thought the 37s looked better in BR blue after the bufferbeam fairings were removed, making them appear less tall. BFYE looked OK on 40s and Peaks due to the flatter dimensions of the noses compared to the 37s. 

 

As for our locomotive aesthetics, I like them all, even the ‘Brians’. The ‘Object’ (Class 28) is perhaps the main design that I would say is really ugly, but it deserves saving just because of that! Well, maybe the ‘Brians’ too, but they do have character and look quite good in the later liveries, even though they couldn’t pull the skin off a rice pudding! I have several on order from Accurascale, including one with the hideous toughened driver’s windscreen, in banger blue too! 😈

Edited June 17, 2022 by 97406

[97406]

On 13/06/2022 at 20:08, Wickham Green too said:

My diesel's got no nose.

 

How does it smell ?

 

 

Terrible !

 

( Apologies to whoever - back in the mists of time - first came up with the smelly dog joke.)

 

“Rancid!”

 

 

I don’t really mean that, especially in Red Stripe livery! 

[Wickham Green too]

7 hours ago, The Johnster said:

...  What about the D800 Warships, AFAIK the first UK 2-cab diesel loco style to dispense with the gangways. ....

But, of course, it wasn't styled in the UK - just copied from the German original.

 

[97406]

51 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

But, of course, it wasn't styled in the UK - just copied from the German original.

 

 

One of ours was done up in the same livery a few years back. 

I thought they looked odd based on the old Lima model, but they looked a lot better in the flesh (or maybe Prestolith). I also think they looked better than their German counterparts.

[SamThomas]

23 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

But, of course, it wasn't styled in the UK - just copied from the German original.

 

& a number of the original V200's are still running.

The original colour scheme still looks good.

[Allegheny1600]

On 17/06/2022 at 10:31, 97406 said:

 

One of ours was done up in the same livery a few years back. 

I thought they looked odd based on the old Lima model, but they looked a lot better in the flesh (or maybe Prestolith). I also think they looked better than their German counterparts.

Curious!

 I love the diesel hydraulics but I’m less keen on the Swindon Warship, perhaps because I find the V200 that it’s based upon, to be far better looking! 
Each to their own, of course.

Back on topic, I don’t know of many European diesel loco designs that had much of a nose, can anyone think of any?

 I exclude the “Nohab” designs as they are clearly American inspired.

The only one that really comes to mind is this;

Copyright “Wolusl” on Flickr.

[jim.snowdon]

On 15/06/2022 at 00:19, MikeRich said:

There's a drawing taken from an April 1947 LMS magazine at:

 

https://twsmedia.co.uk/towards-nationalisation-transport-act-1947/ (linked because copyright is unclear)

 

showing the original design for the Twins with much lower noses, but full height corridors - they really would have scared the horses! Fortunately, someone decided otherwise.

 

Mike.

Those are not full height gangways, but I suggest that they appear taller simply because the sides of the noses have been lowered to provide the driver with a better downward view of the track, an idea that was clearly not adopted for the final design.

 

[Dava]

On 17/06/2022 at 05:24, 97406 said:

I’m glad the Deltics turned out the way they did rather than the Vauxhall wraparound windscreen job or shark nosed which look very odd to my eyes. The plain Banger Blue livery didn’t do them any favours, but this was relieved with the FP white window surrounds. Similarly GFYE looked OK to me. What would have been nice would have been BR blue, but with a pearl grey lower band and  retaining the white window surrounds. However the blue livery was about functionality and austerity rather than style.

 

I grew up well into the banger blue period in the 70s, and I hold a lot of nostalgia for the livery and the time, but I did welcome the explosion of liveries in the 80s, and chose that period as the main one to model.

 

I thought the 37s looked better in BR blue after the bufferbeam fairings were removed, making them appear less tall. BFYE looked OK on 40s and Peaks due to the flatter dimensions of the noses compared to the 37s. 

 

As for our locomotive aesthetics, I like them all, even the ‘Brians’. The ‘Object’ (Class 28) is perhaps the main design that I would say is really ugly, but it deserves saving just because of that! Well, maybe the ‘Brians’ too, but they do have character and look quite good in the later liveries, even though they couldn’t pull the skin off a rice pudding! I have several on order from Accurascale, including one with the hideous toughened driver’s windscreen, in banger blue too! 😈

What is a ‘Brian’, does it have a class number?

[newbryford]

16 minutes ago, Dava said:

What is a ‘Brian’, does it have a class number?

 

Class 31. "Brian" is from Brian the Snail in the TV series "The Magic Roundabout", as Class 31s were considered as slow.

[97406]

5 hours ago, newbryford said:

 

Class 31. "Brian" is from Brian the Snail in the TV series "The Magic Roundabout", as Class 31s were considered as slow.

 

They were also known as ‘Peds’ (pedestrians) and ‘Goyles’ (gargoyles). I’m sure they had other nicknames…

[SamThomas]

21 hours ago, Allegheny1600 said:

Curious!

 I love the diesel hydraulics but I’m less keen on the Swindon Warship, perhaps because I find the V200 that it’s based upon, to be far better looking! 
Each to their own, of course.

Back on topic, I don’t know of many European diesel loco designs that had much of a nose, can anyone think of any?

 I exclude the “Nohab” designs as they are clearly American inspired.

The only one that really comes to mind is this;

Copyright “Wolusl” on Flickr.

The NS Series 1200 OHE's had big noses, the Sprinter EMU's had noses, also the SNCB Serie 21/55 & others had short noses.

[TravisM]

On 13/06/2022 at 09:30, Morello Cherry said:

Cowl units cabs ie FP45 onwards are a development of the F9s with a new styling, that type of cab then gets adopted by CN for their freight locos (GP40-2w) which ultimately has become the dominant style. (The distinction between a spartan cab and a comfort (wide) cab). NS was still ordering spartan cabbed locos until the mid 1990s. But it is effectively a combination of a cowl body cab with a hood unit. The best of both worlds, wide cab with good visibility in all directions.

 

Still none of which tells us why UK locos had bonnets, but I can see nothing in the history of North American diesel design that makes the risk of hitting an animal on the prairies or in the rockies a reason for there to be a bonnet in front of the cab

 

I will quote my cousin who used to work for EMD, if you take the short hood off you will notice two substantial vertical posts which were attached to the main frame and called crew collision bars.  The railroads weren't that bothered about animals being hit, but another train or semi on a level crossing filled with gas or fuel oils, it becomes a whole different matter.  In the mid 70's, EMD started fitting extensions to the front and rear walkways, over the coupler faces and called them 'anti climbers'.  They did exactly what they said on the tin, they could stop a truck, car or railroad vehicle from riding up and over the couplers and crush the cab.

 

As a side note, the Norfolk and Western, the Southern Railway and it's subsidiaries operated their loco's long hood forward to give the crews extra protection, and when ordering new loco's even specified the short hood to be the same height as the long hood up until the early 80's, though the first low front hood loco for the N&W was a GE C30-7 in about 1979.

[MarkC]

On 19/06/2022 at 06:44, 97406 said:

 

They were also known as ‘Peds’ (pedestrians) and ‘Goyles’ (gargoyles). I’m sure they had other nicknames…

They did indeed - the initial batch were known as "Toffee Apples", apparently because of the shape of the power controller...

[Mike_Walker]

10 hours ago, jools1959 said:

 

I will quote my cousin who used to work for EMD, if you take the short hood off you will notice two substantial vertical posts which were attached to the main frame and called crew collision bars.  The railroads weren't that bothered about animals being hit, but another train or semi on a level crossing filled with gas or fuel oils, it becomes a whole different matter.  In the mid 70's, EMD started fitting extensions to the front and rear walkways, over the coupler faces and called them 'anti climbers'.  They did exactly what they said on the tin, they could stop a truck, car or railroad vehicle from riding up and over the couplers and crush the cab.

 

As a side note, the Norfolk and Western, the Southern Railway and it's subsidiaries operated their loco's long hood forward to give the crews extra protection, and when ordering new loco's even specified the short hood to be the same height as the long hood up until the early 80's, though the first low front hood loco for the N&W was a GE C30-7 in about 1979.

A slight clarification.  Anticlimbers are intended to prevent adjoining rail vehicles riding up into each other in the event of rapid deceleration as the result of a collision.  They are fitted to all locomotives and passenger cars and are an AAR and FRA requirement on new equipment from the 1970s.

[TravisM]

4 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

A slight clarification.  Anticlimbers are intended to prevent adjoining rail vehicles riding up into each other in the event of rapid deceleration as the result of a collision.  They are fitted to all locomotives and passenger cars and are an AAR and FRA requirement on new equipment from the 1970s.

 

Which is pretty much what I put.