Why did early stock look so damn ugly?

[delt1c]

Beauty or Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. What is ugly to one person may be beautiful to another. Take the Deltic in BR Blue to me it emphasises the power of the machine. For others it makes it look fat. Its all a mater of taste

 

[Sprinter107]

Beauty or Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. What is ugly to one person may be beautiful to another. Take the Deltic in BR Blue to me it emphasises the power of the machine. For others it makes it look fat. Its all a mater of taste

Absolutely correct.

 

[hexagon789]

Looking at videos of some of the old slam door stock - 308s, 456s etc -it got me thinking - why do they look so damn ugly? Was it design constraint? Price? Lack of vision?

I think it's a matter of personal perception - 309s in lined maroon with the original wrap-round windows look very handsome in my opinion. 308s don't look that bad imo, but I would say 304s or 306s are more functional than pretty.

But you can't beat the "classic" Mark 1 design that reached all parts of the railway; the Glasgow Blue Trains (303's) and the Clacton 309's

Best EMU designs of the era!

I like the utilitarian look, the middle door and middle finger to aerodynamics. By far my favourite is when they have the sloped cabs with the doors in the middle, Iike the 450's.

My least favourite look has to be the pathetic snouts of a 185 or 170, like they had a choice between interoperability or aerodynamics and they chose neither

I'm kind of the opposite, I don't think much of a 450s appearance but like the styling if 170s!

 

[AM9]

The first BR designs in the early 1950s just put two small driving windows in a standard Mk1 vehicle end. The initial Tilbury emus or 4-CEP as examples.

The first OLE powered EMU BR design was the 1500VDC Southend suburban stock in 1956, (later to be converted into the class AM7/307 ac units) which had smaller windows than the later LT&S class AM2/302. The origin of the flat front-end design for EMUs however was Bullied's 1946 new build of 4-sub units. The first BR design of 4-EPB units in 1951 was based on those 4-SUBs. From 1961, the EPBs were fully designed from the MKI bodies and essentially the front ends were very similar to the Southend 307 units with the slightly smaller windows rather than the larger ones on the 302s..

 

[nlogax]

There's so much objectivity attached to our views of stock design. I agree that early stock looked fairly unappealing - that said, I can well imagine that form following function was the understandable design ethos for post-war stock. From the MU perspective the post-steam novelty of a flat front end didn't seem to go away for a long time, and even when things began to change BR designs were still encumbered by functional necessity with through gangways and jumper cables depending on where in the country the stock was destined for.

 

[AM9]

There's so much objectivity attached to our views of stock design. I agree that early stock looked fairly unappealing - that said, I can well imagine that form following function was the understandable design ethos for post-war stock. From the MU perspective the post-steam novelty of a flat front end didn't seem to go away for a long time, and even when things began to change BR designs were still encumbered by functional necessity with through gangways and jumper cables depending on where in the country the stock was destined for.

In high density areas, flat fronted stock does make maximum use of platform length, but the need for all but metro stock to be at least 100mph capable has meant that the recommendations s for crumple zones have driven front-end designs to have some streamlining.

 

[S&CLER]

I always thought the LMS Wirral, Southport and Ormskirk stock of the 1930s was years ahead of its time in appearance and certainly far more stylish than contemporary Southern emus or the LMS's own slam-door stock on the Watford and North London lines. Unfortunately ride quality wasn't always as good.

 

[30907]

I always thought the LMS Wirral, Southport and Ormskirk stock of the 1930s was years ahead of its time in appearance and certainly far more stylish than contemporary Southern emus or the LMS's own slam-door stock on the Watford and North London lines. Unfortunately ride quality wasn't always as good.

Yes, indeed - only the 38 tube stock comes anywhere near. To be fair, having sliding doors not slam doors means you are basically starting from scratch, rather than sticking a driving cab on a second-hand coach body (SR suburban) or standard mainline coach (SR corridor). That said, the LNER Shenfield stock wasn't a thing of beauty - and I found the Bulleid-designed 2-HALs rather attractive.

 

[WesternLancer]

Yes, indeed - only the 38 tube stock comes anywhere near. To be fair, having sliding doors not slam doors means you are basically starting from scratch, rather than sticking a driving cab on a second-hand coach body (SR suburban) or standard mainline coach (SR corridor). That said, the LNER Shenfield stock wasn't a thing of beauty - and I found the Bulleid-designed 2-HALs rather attractive.

Indeed - something of a violent reaction to the style of say the LNER's beavertail observation cars . Same for the Hadfield units too really. The LMS merseyside EMUs must have had some greater design considerations put into the front end style, for whatever reason.

 

[Royston Vasey]

But you can't beat the "classic" Mark 1 design that reached all parts of the railway; the Glasgow Blue Trains (303's) and the Clacton 309's

I think it's a matter of personal perception - 309s in lined maroon with the original wrap-round windows look very handsome in my opinion. 308s don't look that bad imo, but I would say 304s or 306s are more functional than pretty

Best EMU designs of the era!

They must have looked fantastic in maroon with the original windows parked right up to the main road at the P4 buffers at Clacton. 321s are a striking sight to drive by even now. Not in quite the same way!

 

[hexagon789]

They must have looked fantastic in maroon with the original windows parked right up to the main road at the P4 buffers at Clacton. 321s are a striking sight to drive by even now. Not in quite the same way!

Given they were the first 100mph EMUs, had smooth riding Commonwealths, we're reasonably high-powered for the time and were essentially like mainline Mk1 stock inside I think they were one of BR's major steps forward even if technically they used pretty well tried and tested equipment there was nothing fancy about them in that respect.

There isn't too much you can do with a gangway connection front but I think the 309s were as good as you can reasonably get.

 

[AM9]

Given they were the first 100mph EMUs, had smooth riding Commonwealths, we're reasonably high-powered for the time and were essentially like mainline Mk1 stock inside ...

They were actually better from a passenger point of view than the Class 40 and 47-hauled Norwich trains consisting quite indifferent MK 1 stock on BR1 bogies.

... I think they were one of BR's major steps forward even if technically they used pretty well tried and tested equipment there was nothing fancy about them in that respect. ...

They were the test bed for the new wheel profile, which was developed to reduce hunting at high speeds.

 

[hexagon789]

They were actually better from a passenger point of view than the Class 40 and 47-hauled Norwich trains consisting quite indifferent MK 1 stock on BR1 bogies.

And electrically rather than presumably steam heated at that point which would be another plus in the winter.

They were the test bed for the new wheel profile, which was developed to reduce hunting at high speeds.

Ah, never seen that mentioned before so thanks for that.

Was that the only technical innovation, because the power and braking equipment seems fairly standard?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Not a new issue. (Picture below, grabbed from Google, shows sketch of Stockton & Darlington Railway passenger coach 'Experiment',the very first Pacer prototype but at least it beat sitting on top of a load of coal.)

 

[AM9]

Ah, never seen that mentioned before so thanks for that.

Was that the only technical innovation, because the power and braking equipment seems fairly standard?

I think so, the traction was powered through a tap changer set of contactors (just like 302s, 304s, 305s and 308s before them) and EP braking was well matched to the ride quality of the Commonwealth bogies. It was the smooth power that made them favourites on the line as they could keep tight timings on the GEML with a multitude of other services switching on and off the electric lines to give the 309s a clear run.

 

[HSP 2]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned one of the best looking D.M.Us that we ever had in this country. The blue Pullman, but not with the jumper cables on the front end.

 

[Cowley]

I think so, the traction was powered through a tap changer set of contactors (just like 302s, 304s, 305s and 308s before them) and EP braking was well matched to the ride quality of the Commonwealth bogies. It was the smooth power that made them favourites on the line as they could keep tight timings on the GEML with a multitude of other services switching on and off the electric lineds to give the 309s a clear run.

Interesting stuff. I used to use them in the 1980s to visit my great aunt and uncle who lived in Clacton. Even though I was only a teenager at the time they seemed like superb units to me, and they looked the part in Jaffa Cake livery too.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not a new issue. (Picture below, grabbed from Google, shows sketch of Stockton & Darlington Railway passenger coach 'Experiment',the very first Pacer prototype but at least it beat sitting on top of a load of coal.)
View attachment 83784

And Lo! the Class 66 was born.

 

[Jayden99]

I think the jumper cables have a lot to do with it, moving in to the 80s if you compare a 320/1/2, which I think are kind of sleek in their own way, with a 456, which looks like it ran away through a flexible tubing factory, you can see the difference they make. Why did the Southern Region keep up with jumper cables for so long? Were the Networkers their first units that did away with them?

 

[JohnElliott]

Why did the Southern Region keep up with jumper cables for so long?

Because the first time they tried to go to autocouplers (class 508) the couplers didn't work reliably when coupling on a curve. So for the 455s they went back to cables, and the 456s had to interoperate with the 455s so they got cables too.

 

[AM9]

Interesting stuff. I used to use them in the 1980s to visit my great aunt and uncle who lived in Clacton. Even though I was only a teenager at the time they seemed like superb units to me, and they looked the part in Jaffa Cake livery too.

Yes they were in their time splendid trains and in my experience, the best EMUs until the second wave of MKIII units were introduced, - I.e. the 319s/323s. I can hear tutting about MKI seating vs MK Ashburton

I think the jumper cables have a lot to do with it, moving in to the 80s if you compare a 320/1/2, which I think are kind of sleek in their own way, with a 456, which looks like it ran away through a flexible tubing factory, you can see the difference they make. Why did the Southern Region keep up with jumper cables for so long? Were the Networkers their first units that did away with them?

Would it be the combined effects of:

Most of the EMU fleet was an embodiment of practices that started in the '20s and was perpetuated until the early noughties​

Splitting and joining was a common practice throughout the last century (and still is to a degree), so the station layout and staffing arrangements were set up for manual coupling/uncoupling​

And​

The above two practices and the resulting flexibility of stock diagramming they afforded created a reluctance to change?​

 

[43096]

There isn't too much you can do with a gangway connection front but I think the 309s were as good as you can reasonably get.

It’s an opinion of course, but the 158s and 442s also showed what can be done with gangway design (particularly the 442).

 

[JonathanH]

It’s an opinion of course, but the 158s and 442s also showed what can be done with gangway design (particularly the 442).

The 471 mock up was even cleaner in terms of the way it incorporated the gangway.

 

[DerekC]

Not a new issue. (Picture below, grabbed from Google, shows sketch of Stockton & Darlington Railway passenger coach 'Experiment',the very first Pacer prototype but at least it beat sitting on top of a load of coal.)
View attachment 83784

Now that's what I call "early rolling stock". I confess that the assumption in this thread that the railway commenced operations in about 1978 made me smile! Just showing my age!!

 

[hexagon789]

It’s an opinion of course, but the 158s and 442s also showed what can be done with gangway design (particularly the 442).

I overlooked those deliberately because we were discussing early BR stock but the point is perfectly valid of course. The 442s especially have more than a passing similarity to 309s.

I think so, the traction was powered through a tap changer set of contactors (just like 302s, 304s, 305s and 308s before them) and EP braking was well matched to the ride quality of the Commonwealth bogies. It was the smooth power that made them favourites on the line as they could keep tight timings on the GEML with a multitude of other services switching on and off the electric lines to give the 309s a clear run.

Any idea how many "taps" 309s have? I know 303s have 12 (Notch 1 gives 1, Notch 2 gives up to 7, Notch 3 gives up to 12 and Notch 4 gives up to 12+weak field). I assume 309s probably have more taps given the higher speed.

 

[Dr_Paul]

I always thought the LMS Wirral, Southport and Ormskirk stock of the 1930s was years ahead of its time in appearance and certainly far more stylish than contemporary Southern emus or the LMS's own slam-door stock on the Watford and North London lines. Unfortunately ride quality wasn't always as good.

I remember seeing a picture of the Wirral stock in a book when I was a kid, and thinking how modern they looked compared to the Southern EMUs of their time.

One thing that's long puzzled me about the Southern EMUs is why one group of them, the prewar 6-PAN, 6-CIT and 6-PUL, had considerably fewer jumper cables dangling on the driving ends compared to the other Southern electrics of that time (some pictures here). This gave them a much cleaner appearance.

I agree with others here in saying that what is attractive is a subjective matter, one of personal aesthetic taste. Having said that, I do think that however ugly some old EMUs were, there are some right ugly ones amongst the modern ones too, such as the 385 class, which (being a Londoner) I'm glad are kept a long way off in Scotland; I wouldn't want one of them to turn up at my local station.

 

[AM9]

... Any idea how many "taps" 309s have? I know 303s have 12 (Notch 1 gives 1, Notch 2 gives up to 7, Notch 3 gives up to 12 and Notch 4 gives up to 12+weak field). I assume 309s probably have more taps given the higher speed.

I'm not privy to such detail, I was only an (interested) passenger in the '70s. I would imagine that the 309s had the same number of taps, the different speed profile being achieved by the different final drive gear ratio. I have figures in my mind (from a railway journal article about the class 312 stock where it stated that the suburban units had maximum acceleration rates of 1.35mph/s, the 309s rate was 0.9mph/s and the new 312s rate was 1.1mph/s. The article focused on the 90mph maximum speed of the new trains matched against the existing stock's 75mph meant that as semi-fasts on the GEML, they were well matched to the paths that were available.

 

[randyrippley]

Any idea how many "taps" 309s have? I know 303s have 12 (Notch 1 gives 1, Notch 2 gives up to 7, Notch 3 gives up to 12 and Notch 4 gives up to 12+weak field). I assume 309s probably have more taps given the higher speed.

Please excuse the aside, but this sounds like something from "This is Spinal Tap".................."ours goes to eleven"

 

[hexagon789]

I'm not privy to such detail, I was only an (interested) passenger in the '70s. I would imagine that the 309s had the same number of taps, the different speed profile being achieved by the different final drive gear ratio. I have figures in my mind (from a railway journal article about the class 312 stock where it stated that the suburban units had maximum acceleration rates of 1.35mph/s, the 309s rate was 0.9mph/s and the new 312s rate was 1.1mph/s. The article focused on the 90mph maximum speed of the new trains matched against the existing stock's 75mph meant that as semi-fasts on the GEML, they were well matched to the paths that were available.

No worries, just wondered if you knew. I'm not sure 309s would necessarily have 12 plus weak field; 305s have 20 plus two stages of field weakening!

Please excuse the aside, but this sounds like something from "This is Spinal Tap".................."ours goes to eleven"

Perhaps I should've put transformer secondary winding voltage taps!

 

[contrex]

Sorry, when you said early stock I was thinking Liverpool and Manchester... 308s weren't even built when I was little

I was thinking District Railway B stock (1905) or Bury-Holcombe Brook (1912). Now that's what I call "early". And fairly ugly as well.