From: Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk   
      
   In article ,   
    Glen Labah  wrote:   
      
   > In article ,   
   >  "conklin"  wrote:   
   >   
   > >  wrote in message   
   > > news:7p2k4ade9d4ltuq5ugajtuu3c8q9958998@4ax.com...   
   >   
   > > > Some of them may have thought such locos a bit brutal looking with   
   > > > much of the piping and other bits visible compared to a British Loco.   
   > > > Conversely after that the period the final post war builds of British   
   > > > Locos were designed with features incorporating North American ideas   
   > > > where the accessibility to maintain the bits was becoming more   
   > > > important than an uncluttered look.   
   >   
   >   
   > Into 1956, British Rail was still building 0-6-0 steam locomotives that   
   > looked like this:   
   > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:9466_Tyseley_(1).jpg   
   >   
   > Then, for a 6 wheel diesel replacement, there were several hundred of   
   > these kicking about all over the country:   
   > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yeoman_Class_08.JPG   
      
   Nearly 1200 of that general outline with a few different engine and   
   transmission arrangements plus over 100 exported.  Ugly but functional.   
      
   > It's easy for me to see why British steam locomotives seem so much more   
   > popular than their diesel locomotives.   
   >   
   > > You are rightt that ease of service was the issue, with the  sleek look   
   > > making service harder and the American focus was on keeping the working   
   > > parts accessible.   
   >   
   >   
   > There was also the deal where the typical British steam locomotive   
   > didn't need an air pump and related air brake pipe scattered all over   
   > the boiler since they used vacuum brakes during the steam years.   
   >   
   > Imagine what Great Northern locomotives, in their splendid Green and   
   > Silver paint, would have looked like had they not also had to have air   
   > pumps on them:   
   > https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnm3000/7860816500/   
      
   I take it some aspect of the design meant that the smokebox didn't have   
   to be cleaned too often.   
      
   Many European locos had extraneous pipes, cylinders, pumps and domes   
   scattered around them in a way that looked very untidy to British eyes.   
      
   > > However, fo diesels, I don't see the ugly designs we get today, compared to   
   > > the "steamliners," is a service issue.  Ugly cars don't sell.  Ugly engines   
   > > do.   
   >   
   >   
   > With the decline of passenger trains in the USA, the only thing left is   
   > what pulls freight trains. For the most part, the management of the   
   > railroad doesn't care what the locomotive looks like so long as it is   
   > working well   
   > http://www.railpictures.net/photo/331015/   
      
   But there's been a change in US diesel design.  They used to generally   
   have the look that the works were all placed under a single cover.   
   These days the roof line is interrupted in a way that makes it look like   
   a different engineer was involved in making the shelter for each piece   
   of equipment.  The effect is a line of random tin sheds lined up on the   
   chassis.   
      
   Sam   
      
   --   
   The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in   
   Scotland, with registration number SC005336.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)