ugly trains

[sawyer811]

A Cousin:

I'd love to see this modeled... Though the livery makes it, I saw one all orange, now THAT was ugly!

Hmm, so that's where this guy came from:

hard to tell if this was one of the GM 600 units or a close cousin (Don's Depot calls it a GE SL110, but I'm highly doubtful that that's the proper designation). If it is one of these GM units, it's had its rather flashy end fairings cut off: which would make sense given its long life. This guy worked, and still works, at a power plant near my house in Fairfax, Kansas, Near the old MoPac/currently Union Pacific yards.

 

[nathanmallard]

Nope. That is a GE SL110. Here are some other images:

 

[jlp1551]

Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. and a lot of these are really ugly. But, if the machine works for what it was designed to do, what the heck!
Maybe what is needed is an annual "Ugly Loco" contest!:hehe:

 

[Blutorse4792]

I remember seeing this fella a couple times when I was just an ankle-biter...

The original "Geep".

 

[TheWaluigiKing]

Anything thats not a locomotive!:hehe:

 

[Mick_Berg]

I've had enough of this thread. Everybody says 'this is the ugliest locomotive.' Then someone says 'that's not the ugliest locomotive, this is the ugliest locomotive.' This series of comments continues on and on and on. That is, or part, of the reason why there's 68 pages, and counting, of comments about which locomotive is the ugliest. I believe that everyone has their own right to say what they believe is the ugliest locomotive is. However, here's a couple of questions that people seem to ignore:
Is this the ugliest locomotive in the world?
Is this the ugliest locomotive in (place country here (i.e. United Kingdom))?
I must comment that there are some locomotives that should not be called an 'ugly locomotive.' The 4-6-2 Flying Scotsman and The Mallard are perfect examples of locomotives that should not be on this list of ugly locomotives. These two locomotives are well-known, and are known by people around the world. Why would they be considered ugly?
I will feel very good if this thread is closed or people are unable to post new pictures or anything else in this thread.

What else is the thread for, than to post pictures of trains that people think are ugly? I appreciate some of the weird creations that otherwise I would never see.
But to suggest that the Mallard, (and consequently all Gresley's Pacific A4's) is ugly, is absurd.

A quick cure for your problem, don't follow the thread.................:wave:

Mick Berg.

 

[BD1]

placemarker

 

[GeorgeCW]

Love this thread - trouble is I go I've seen or worked on that and then they date it - ouch

 

[doitall]

Sd40-3 and SD60E. Nuf said

 

[cvw]

I've absolutely no idea.

Its a train from mars...... *pfft*

 

[bl4882]

Hello BD1,

No offense intended, but what exactly does it take to embarass CP Rail? If you know, of course.

Bernie

 

[cvw]

Don't get me started and i don't even know why this was even developed.


Seriously, "it" looks like a GP38 on steroids and tried to blend in, but 1 major flaw? Anyone?

I just found a future project.....

 

[SUBWAY125]

Sd40-3 and SD60E. Nuf said

Agreed. The cab is too flat.

 

[BD1]

placemarker

 

[John514]

A self propelled caboose! What will they think of next.
I think the RS-3 was rebuilt to give better visibility over the front. They didn't need a steam boiler for train heat, so they lowered the entire section.

Claude

Thats common with the MLWs here in Greece.

 

[jlp1551]

You'd think they would call NS34 a swayback!

 

[rjhowie]

I have often thought that many of the North American locos tend to look a little chunky and not too streamlined, etc. It may be a culture thing or following the great demise of the passenger side that lost the streamline effect for so long? In fairness those living with them will take a diffirent view and a different tradition I am sure but that's my tuppence worth.

 

[dgallina]

Aw come on. BL2's are so fugly they are kinda cute

 

[John514]

it was built to run along the side of a road. more then 90% of the weight of the engine and wagons/carrages actually did rest on, was carried by the rail rather then the outriggers. there is/was a fairly complete article about the system on an indian railfan site. or an indian rail musium site. i don't know if its still there or not.

personally i see diminuative form factor as rescuing almost anything that runs on a guideway from complete ugliness, and the disseconomies of excessive scale, to which north american standard guage freight opperations are no exception, as being the main line of uggliness. yet even there, this is from time to time redeamed by sufficiently bizaar interestingness.

i do find paintjobs with humanlike features unattractive as well. appearently some members of the general public don't, or marketing guru's don't, or something. i DO like intese, cool colors, arrainged in intersting hard edge graphic ways.

thomas is ugly, that idea of putting a human face on everything that would have a perfectly good and attractive appearance otherwise is ugly on general principals. creative graphix are not, as long as the're about an intrinsic geometric aesthetic, and not trying to make something look like something its not.

So its a rail bicycle!!!:hehe:

 

[cascaderailroad]

No ... It's a Tricycle built for 20 !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Patiala_State_Monorail_System.jpg

Or a self propelled, steam powered, "Radio Flyer" wagon !