Blutorse4792
Now T:ANE I can get into
Ladies and Gentlemen... The "T"
ugly trains
- Thread starter paul502
- Start date
jadebullet
might be back?
Looks like the one loco the Reading had. It was a giant piece of junk and had a reliability rating of 20 something percent.
http://www.readingmodeler.com/index...omotives/161-fairbanks-morse-600hp-center-cab
http://www.readingmodeler.com/index...omotives/161-fairbanks-morse-600hp-center-cab
Ladies and Gentlemen... The "T"
Could possibly be rebuilt as a diesel electric with modern materials and actually be successful as a switching engine. Get a load of the tractive effort on that one, that's got four trucks under it. I'd be interested to see what this could do if it was made as a diesel-electric and built to be successful.
jadebullet
might be back?
Any American locomotive that tries to look British looks really ugly to me. A good example of this is Baltimore and Ohio #5320, the only P9 Pacific and the only B&O Pacific styled after UK steam. Unfortunately I can't find a pic outside of a book. Similarly, but not as much is their duplex experiment.
Another example is the various Delaware and Hudson steam locomotives styled in a similar manner, but going even further with their attempt to recreate the UK styling.
This is dumb. I just want to point out that I am not just being the typical American who hates UK steam because it looks stupid here by the way. What I am saying here is that styling a locomotive by hiding all of the piping underneath the jacket, and trying as hard as you can to hid the compressor pumps, tanks, and various other components from the external sight lines is a very poor decision and actually makes the locomotive less useful.
There is a very good reason why various sets of piping are externally visible. The first, and most important one is maintenance. The pipes need to be able to be visually inspected often in order to avoid any potential failures. Various drain plugs must also be opened, usually before each operation, in order to remove condensation from the steam lines. If your piping is hidden under a jacket you are not going to be able to adequately inspect the various high pressure pipes in a timely manner. Draining these pipes will also prove difficult, or more complicated than the drains on a typical pipe arrangement. Secondly, space will be at a premium. There is going to be a lot of piping underneath the jacket, especially with the required air pipe length. This means that there is going to be less lagging which could potentially reduce the thermal insulation capability of the lagging in certain areas. The heat could also cause some issues that need to be rectified in the piping due to the pipes being hotter than the usual design. (though this will also provide an advantage in some cases. )
Then you get to the components themselves. In order to hide them, the air tanks and compressors are placed between the frames. Once again visual inspection is going to be much more difficult to perform correctly, and any repairs and maintenance is going to be severely restricted by the placement.
Finally the locomotive is going to be severely restricted in what you can actually mount on it when it comes to modern steam locomotives. A feed water heater, with the exception of some of the later Worthington heaters, will be very difficult, if not impossible to hide on the locomotive. Add in the pumps required and you probably will not be able to do it, at least not without fouling the smooth UK styling. A tender, or trailing truck booster will be downright impossible due to the steam pipe needed to reach the booster, and a front end throttle will add an unsightly box to the smokebox. Unlike streamlining, you can't just build a shroud around it and call it a day. You have to have a smooth, rounded smokebox door, a smooth boiler, free of any obstructions or pipes, and a crisp clean look.
Now visually, I will say that I don't like them either. I just don't like UK steam. It is small and weak looking without any visible piping. They just look like they are a dainty fair lady pretending that they can work in a factory or a coal mine in their flowing, elegant dress. It just doesn't work for me. I personally like large, low boilers with a bunch of piping and meaty looking cylinders and drivers. Locomotives are meant to do heavy, dirty work and they just don't look right when they don't look the part. And yes, I know, passenger locomotives aren't doing dirty work. When it comes to passenger steam, I do like them to have cleaner lines and a smoother jacket, but they still need to have piping visible to look right to me. I like when the lines of the locomotive work with the piping and the components, adding them to its sleek predatory look, rather than hiding them and trying to seem dainty. Though putting them behind side skirting does look pretty nice if it is done right. That and I find the lack of safety equipment to be appalling. I don't care what you say about fencing and all of that junk. Locomotives should be able to constantly, and adequately illuminate their path, and at least partially deflect any large object on the tracks before it is hit by the lead wheels. They also should be able to give not only a loud, short warning with the whistle, but a constant warning with a bell in order to alert those surrounding the locomotive to its presence in certain situations where a whistle is not effective, either due to duration or due to echo. To me, the decision not to include these safety measures on UK steam is just people putting form over function, and putting lives at risk in order to have a prettier looking engine.
Another example is the various Delaware and Hudson steam locomotives styled in a similar manner, but going even further with their attempt to recreate the UK styling.
This is dumb. I just want to point out that I am not just being the typical American who hates UK steam because it looks stupid here by the way. What I am saying here is that styling a locomotive by hiding all of the piping underneath the jacket, and trying as hard as you can to hid the compressor pumps, tanks, and various other components from the external sight lines is a very poor decision and actually makes the locomotive less useful.
There is a very good reason why various sets of piping are externally visible. The first, and most important one is maintenance. The pipes need to be able to be visually inspected often in order to avoid any potential failures. Various drain plugs must also be opened, usually before each operation, in order to remove condensation from the steam lines. If your piping is hidden under a jacket you are not going to be able to adequately inspect the various high pressure pipes in a timely manner. Draining these pipes will also prove difficult, or more complicated than the drains on a typical pipe arrangement. Secondly, space will be at a premium. There is going to be a lot of piping underneath the jacket, especially with the required air pipe length. This means that there is going to be less lagging which could potentially reduce the thermal insulation capability of the lagging in certain areas. The heat could also cause some issues that need to be rectified in the piping due to the pipes being hotter than the usual design. (though this will also provide an advantage in some cases. )
Then you get to the components themselves. In order to hide them, the air tanks and compressors are placed between the frames. Once again visual inspection is going to be much more difficult to perform correctly, and any repairs and maintenance is going to be severely restricted by the placement.
Finally the locomotive is going to be severely restricted in what you can actually mount on it when it comes to modern steam locomotives. A feed water heater, with the exception of some of the later Worthington heaters, will be very difficult, if not impossible to hide on the locomotive. Add in the pumps required and you probably will not be able to do it, at least not without fouling the smooth UK styling. A tender, or trailing truck booster will be downright impossible due to the steam pipe needed to reach the booster, and a front end throttle will add an unsightly box to the smokebox. Unlike streamlining, you can't just build a shroud around it and call it a day. You have to have a smooth, rounded smokebox door, a smooth boiler, free of any obstructions or pipes, and a crisp clean look.
Now visually, I will say that I don't like them either. I just don't like UK steam. It is small and weak looking without any visible piping. They just look like they are a dainty fair lady pretending that they can work in a factory or a coal mine in their flowing, elegant dress. It just doesn't work for me. I personally like large, low boilers with a bunch of piping and meaty looking cylinders and drivers. Locomotives are meant to do heavy, dirty work and they just don't look right when they don't look the part. And yes, I know, passenger locomotives aren't doing dirty work. When it comes to passenger steam, I do like them to have cleaner lines and a smoother jacket, but they still need to have piping visible to look right to me. I like when the lines of the locomotive work with the piping and the components, adding them to its sleek predatory look, rather than hiding them and trying to seem dainty. Though putting them behind side skirting does look pretty nice if it is done right. That and I find the lack of safety equipment to be appalling. I don't care what you say about fencing and all of that junk. Locomotives should be able to constantly, and adequately illuminate their path, and at least partially deflect any large object on the tracks before it is hit by the lead wheels. They also should be able to give not only a loud, short warning with the whistle, but a constant warning with a bell in order to alert those surrounding the locomotive to its presence in certain situations where a whistle is not effective, either due to duration or due to echo. To me, the decision not to include these safety measures on UK steam is just people putting form over function, and putting lives at risk in order to have a prettier looking engine.
If the N&W #611 could talk, I'm pretty sure she would disagree with all your talking points!
The most powerful 4-8-4 ever built... and arguably the most advanced.
Last edited:
If the N&W #611 could talk, I'm pretty sure she would disagree with all your talking points!
The most powerful 4-8-4 ever built... and arguably the most advanced.
If the #611 could talk, I wonder what kind of stories she could tell about her service back in the days of steam. I'll bet she'd be arguing if she ever shared a shed with the 3751, 4449, SP&S 700, one of the NYC Dreyfuss streamlined Hudsons, and one of the UP's legendary 9000 4-12-2s.
jadebullet
might be back?
If I remember correctly there is quite a bit of piping under the side skirting. Also that isn't really a British styled locomotive as much as a streamliner. And it is built by Norfolk Western so I trust their steam building judgement. Does anyone know if that thing has access hatches or anything like that to get to the hidden stuff? And where are the pumps on a J class? Are they in the pilot because I doubt that N&W would put them between the frames.
WarspiteWorks9017
Calling at Newington...
@nathanmallard
I personally disagree with the Q1- and 466
I see the 466 every DAY and i have not died yet. But isn't the prettiest I know.
But I don't like the class 70's.
It's a little bit big.. and american. It just does not look right on British rails.
I personally disagree with the Q1- and 466
I see the 466 every DAY and i have not died yet. But isn't the prettiest I know.
But I don't like the class 70's.
It's a little bit big.. and american. It just does not look right on British rails.
ehamerstone
Jr.hogger1 & Agrotred40
Actually the SEPTA you took a picture of is actually an ALP44
That really doesn't look very american to me. I know it was built here, but you would never see that on a mainline.@nathanmallard
I personally disagree with the Q1- and 466
I see the 466 every DAY and i have not died yet. But isn't the prettiest I know.
But I don't like the class 70's.
Pic below, is an N&W Class J without streamlining. The pumps are in front of the cylinders, behind the running-board steps, as is the bell.
Last edited:
ehamerstone
Jr.hogger1 & Agrotred40
It's really an E9BA, it's has the name Crandall Cab and it was ex-UP E9B's
Last edited:
ehamerstone
Jr.hogger1 & Agrotred40
ALL ABOARD THE FAIL TRAIN!this ones gonna look ugly by the time its all over ..... ok ill be truthful i came across the pic and didnt know where else to put it. shame on me i know i know :hehe:
captainkman
You are reading this.
Very arguably. The South African 'Red Devil' 4-8-4's are the most advanced by far.
@WarspiteWorks: Yes, the Clas 70 is very American. Why? it's square. Very square. Not the personality trait, the shape.
@wva_usa: The N&W J class looks better without the streamlining. But it's still ugly to me...
@bigfitzy & ehamerstone: That's a really old picture that's photoshopped from the promotion picture of the Cairns Kuranda Scenic Railway, up (from where I am at least) in Cairns, Queensland.
In theory, the Red Devils had advanced features (a la Porta), but in reality they performed poorly (wheel slippage, hard to restart on grades, poor pulling power at low speeds, yadda, yadda, yadda).
Meanwhile, the Js worked flawlessly...
Porta probably could have worked out the bugs with the Red Devils but unfortunately the end of steam was underway before he could do so...
Perhaps Porta's son will be able to pick up where his dad left off someday soon...
Last edited:
ehamerstone
Jr.hogger1 & Agrotred40
It is.... an MK-50-3:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
We are here to discuss locomotives that we think are ugly, not which 4-8-4 is the best. So to add my two cents worth I say the camelback at the B&O museum
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=401997&nseq=18
and the Chessie's streamlined hudsons
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=331685
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=401997&nseq=18
and the Chessie's streamlined hudsons
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=331685
jadebullet
might be back?
I would just like to point out that that is a Camel, not a Camelback. There is a difference. Camels have the cab on top of the boiler for visibility or something like that. Camelbacks have the cab astride the boiler because of the wide Wootten firebox behind the cab.
Anyway, back to ugly trains.
I personally think that these things are pretty ugly. They are just too British looking.
On the subject of ugly:
Everytime I read posts in this thread I'm reminded of the Oscar Wilde quote, "Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming.".
Carry on...
the J1's weren't the most powerful, the 2900 were more powerful than the J1 class, but that was probably due to the fact that the 2900 were the heaviest northerns ever builtIf the N&W #611 could talk, I'm pretty sure she would disagree with all your talking points!
The most powerful 4-8-4 ever built... and arguably the most advanced.