And the ugliest engine of the year award goes to...

[sawyer811]

:hehe:

FIRST: NO, this is NOT the REAL 483. This is 487 disguised as 483. all joking aside, this is a photo freight run by the C&TS for its 40th aniversary. The garish paint scheme is what the real 483 wore for the 1968 movie "The Good Guys and the Bad Guys."

Unfortunately, the train could only be run about 4 miles to Labato and back. this was in August 27, 2010. Hopefully the bridge will be open in time for the 2011 season.

but still, we can do without the paint. :hehe:

 

[Mitchey]

You've just hurt it's feelings...

Heh heh... seriously though? Yeah, it looks dodgy.

 

[JCitron]

It's the wheels that are a bit too much. Silver or black would be much better.

 

[sawyer811]

You've just hurt it's feelings...

*487 at the therapist's office*

*487* then, then, he called me the ugliest engine of the year!! *sob*

*therapist* and how does that make you feel?

*487* and how do you THINK that makes me feel?!?!?

*Therapist* well, how does it make you feel?

*487* Terrible!!

*therapist* There, does that make you feel better?

*487* get out!!

*therapist running down the track, chased by 487*

:hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe:

 

[UP5521]

what in the,I like her regular colors vs this!

 

[sterrett]

Our Oliver Bulleid designed and built the "Q1" locomotives to cope with the shortages following World War Two. Nicknamed the "Ugly Ducklings", they earned respect from their economy and their power.

I'll leave you to decide which is uglier!

If you're interested, thee is a feature on the Q1 here:

http://www.semgonline.com/steam/q1_01.html

 

[sawyer811]

aren't those just Austerity 0-6-0Ts converted to tender engines? Or is my utter ignorance of british steam showing agian

And its probably a tie. The 480s are good looking normally, but the series of paint schemes movie companies think up for them (for some stupid reason) just make them look horrible. The Q1s are just ugly by themselves (no offense to anyone).

 

[sterrett]

aren't those just Austerity 0-6-0Ts converted to tender engines? Or is my utter ignorance of british steam showing agian

No - the "Q1's" were a completely radical design. There were many different locomotive designs collectively known as "Austerity" and the "Q1" class (redesignated "C1" by British Railways) was included in the "Austerity" group.

The "Austerity's" were beautiful by comparison and there were many different "War Department" Austerity locomotives - many built in the USA and shipped over under the "lend-lease" agreement between Franklin J Roosevelt and Winston S Churchill before the USA entered World Wart Two! Many of those "Austerity" locos survived right up to the end of steam in 1968. Indeed, at least one survives on the preserved "Bluebell Railway" in Sussex.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/#/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/lightbox/

Don't worry. Your ignorance of British steam is surpassed by my ignorance of US railroading - although I am keen to learn and my work in aviation often takes me to the land of the "Silverton" and the "Union Pacific"

Happy Christmas!

 

[UP4021]

How could they do that terrible thing to that poor engine!

Who was the mental case who thought of that paint scheme?

 

[sawyer811]

No - the "Q1's" were a completely radical design. There were many different locomotive designs collectively known as "Austerity" and the "Q1" class (redesignated "C1" by British Railways) was included in the "Austerity" group.

The "Austerity's" were beautiful by comparison and there were many different "War Department" Austerity locomotives - many built in the USA and shipped over under the "lend-lease" agreement between Franklin J Roosevelt and Winston S Churchill before the USA entered World Wart Two! Many of those "Austerity" locos survived right up to the end of steam in 1968. Indeed, at least one survives on the preserved "Bluebell Railway" in Sussex.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/#/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/lightbox/

Don't worry. Your ignorance of British steam is surpassed by my ignorance of US railroading - although I am keen to learn and my work in aviation often takes me to the land of the "Silverton" and the "Union Pacific"

Happy Christmas!

oh wow, that little 0-6-0's cute!!! they might want to keep a good guard on that, otherwise it will vanish one night and reappear in my backyard:hehe:

How could they do that terrible thing to that poor engine!

Who was the mental case who thought of that paint scheme?

the movie writers. for some idiotic reason they think that those garish schemes equate to the brassed-up 4-4-0s of the 1800's.

 

[mallarddriver148]

Ugliest Train

:'( I feel sick looking at this engine

 

[legolistic]

:'( I feel sick looking at this engine

Screw the mallard. It's slow as a snail.

BIG BOY FTW!

 

[sawyer811]

The Big Boy's beautiful in that "Get the *bleep* out of my way or i'll make you my pilot ornament" way. She's a brute, but, then again, so is a 9F or Big Bertha from the Lickey.

 

[jadebullet]

Meh, not a fan of Bigboys. I prefer other Mallets.

 

[sawyer811]

My personal favorites are D&RGW's pump-fronted 4-6-6-4s with that massive redundant striped thing on the pilot. they just look cool. then again, C&O's 2-6-6-2s look nice too...

 

[captainkman]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/#/photos/49572843@N00/5029428819/lightbox/

I have a video of TWO of those being transported by truck.

 

[mallarddriver148]

Screw the mallard. It's slow as a snail.

BIG BOY FTW!

Correction:Screw the UP Big Boy
It bareley moves it's wheels

 

[uracco]

New mega correction

Correction:Screw the UP Big Boy
It bareley moves it's wheels

Correction Screw all American trains
They are just Pug ugly and don't move a CM for 4 hours

 

[sawyer811]

Don't even start...Just because every freight engine isn't streamlined and striped up like a damn speedster doesn't mean they're ugly. You guys care about how flashy the engine looks...we care about what really matters; pulling power. In a book i've read, it says many of your pacifics were meant to haul 600 ton trains. Ours regulary top 2000+. And the Big Boy can eat your 9Fs, your one-off Beyer Garratts, your stainer 8Fs, all for breakfast and then spit out the steel frames. She can hustle a 5 Mile freight train up the grade or Sherman Hill and over the top without a helper. Your 9Fs couldn't even Start a train like that. All you guys seem to care about is making them look nice, from my bystander's point of view. I'm not going to lie, the Flying Scotsman, the Duchesses, many of your engines look nice. It just they're hampered by a pansy loading guage. Our engines may not look nice, but they get the job done, and in the end, that's all that matters.

 

[UP4021]

Comparison time

British train:

American train:

Now.

First of all, just which is carrying more? Getting the job done?

Two, it could be just my oppinion, but everything in that British photo looks like a part of a scrap move.

Three, who wants their train to be pulled by a duck?

I try not to get mad, and I am showing restraint as usual. There are sone ugly engines in america, I am not doubting that.
But sir(s), you just crossed the line.

No one talks smack about the Big Boy while I'm around!


EDIT: BTW, fun fact about the Big Boys.

By the time that they were retired about twenty years after they were built, they had each ran about one million miles.

Can barely move under their own weight?

I think not.