I think that the new engine that started this topic is good looking for a modern engine.
NH Joe
Another image of the EMD F125 for Metrolink.
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
Opinions vary!............................................
Better than some modern styling but not a classic, for sure. My neighbor is one of the "sick & tireds" from the Fruits & Nuts state. Loves it here and got a nice wife as a bonus.
Not my cup of tea, but I guess that is the future of passenger locomotives. The new NJT engines are even uglier.
Another F125 locomotive photo I found on Railpictures.net.
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
OGR Webmaster posted:I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY.
Agree Rich, she's a real "butterface" as in "She's got a decent carbody, but her face.".
Pine Creek Railroad posted:Gentlemen,
There are some people that think a GG1 is Ugly also, each to his own!
PCRR/Dave
Sickos.
naveenrajan posted:Another F125 locomotive photo I found on Railpictures.net.
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
"Honey, I Blew Up My Preparation H!"
Anyone know the REAL reason Metrolink is running BNSF AC4400W's in front of the cab cars? One story I heard was they were to supplement problem locomotives, but I'm seeing them on trains with the newer MP36C's.
AGHRMatt posted:Anyone know the REAL reason Metrolink is running BNSF AC4400W's in front of the cab cars? One story I heard was they were to supplement problem locomotives, but I'm seeing them on trains with the newer MP36C's.
My understanding is that after the accident last year when a train hit the pickup and a crewman died in the new style cab car it was determined that the design was insufficient in its safety. So they decided to run locomotives at both ends of the trains. The problem is that Metrolink does not have enough locomotives available, so they leased power from BNSF.
Stuart
Stuart posted:AGHRMatt posted:Anyone know the REAL reason Metrolink is running BNSF AC4400W's in front of the cab cars? One story I heard was they were to supplement problem locomotives, but I'm seeing them on trains with the newer MP36C's.
My understanding is that after the accident last year when a train hit the pickup and a crewman died in the new style cab car it was determined that the design was insufficient in its safety. So they decided to run locomotives at both ends of the trains. The problem is that Metrolink does not have enough locomotives available, so they leased power from BNSF.
Stuart
To the extent I still remember what I read following last year’s derailment in Oxnard, I also agree with Stuart’s statements.
Apparently Metrolink had higher confidence in the crash survivability of these newer cab cars from Hyundai-Rotem compared to the previous cab cars made by Bombardier but the death of the sole crew member in the Oxnard crash forced Metrolink to include another locomotive ahead of these cab cars.
It is my opinion that US commuter railroads, almost all with many grade crossings had been configuring trains with cab cars on the end away from the locomotive. After fatal accidents in which these cab cars we involved, in the last decade some changed their operating procedures to require no passengers to be in these cab cars if the cab cars were leading. I am not sure if Metrolink had similar procedures but the engineer was the only fatality in the Oxnard crash.
Most recently the newest commuter railroad in Florida, All Aboard Florida / Brightline will not have any cab cars. There trains will have a Siemens Charger locomotive at each end.
These are just my opinion,
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
I suspected as much. Just heard from a contact at BNSF and he gave me the run-down on the problem with the cars. Interestingly enough, the Bombardier cab cars had very good structural integrity, judging by the one involved in the head-on collision with a BNSF freight train in Orange County. The problem is perception, so I suspect we'll be seeing locomotives at both ends for some time.
For some trains, would something like the Amtrak cabbage cars be a better option?
I found the following 2 images on Flickr, the second one is from the official unveiling of the EMD F125.
These are just my opinion,
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
The ALCo PA and EMD E, F, FP locomotives were designed in-house by private industry leaders in compliance with those demands place upon them by their customers - the railroads. Most "modern" (Post War) railroad passenger color schemes were cooked up by these same folks. Great contemporary industrial designers, such as Loewy, Dreyfuss, Kuhler and Stevens, were called in primarily to dress up existing functional designs - not create new designs from the ground up.
Now, locomotives are designed in compliance with government dictates and look like "Bullet Trains" despite the fact that they are, for the most part, only used on short-haul commuter lines where speeds seldom exceed 60 mph. The color schemes are designed by the "Art-In-Transit Committee" to delight "The Collective" but, with few exceptions, look to be the product of a 3 year old with a box of Crayons.
The only objective test is the Test of Time. Do a Google search for "railroad poster art", the kind of stuff that Young People hang on dormitory and apartment walls, and see what examples of American railroad equipment you find.
Hint: You'll find little that was designed after 1958.
Rapid Transit Holmes posted:The ALCo PA and EMD E, F, FP locomotives were designed in-house by private industry leaders in compliance with those demands place upon them by their customers - the railroads.
And yet, PA's E's, F's and FP's gave way to these...
Rusty
Attachments
Images (3)
It was said a long time ago that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. This beholder sees no beauty in that engine.
Bad.
"Compared to the classic lines of an Alco PA or an EMD E-unit, that thing is just plain UGLY."
UGLY? There's that word again! I wonder what Ace thinks? 
Rapid Transit Holmes posted:The ALCo PA and EMD E, F, FP locomotives were designed in-house by private industry leaders in compliance with those demands place upon them by their customers - the railroads. Most "modern" (Post War) railroad passenger color schemes were cooked up by these same folks. Great contemporary industrial designers, such as Loewy, Dreyfuss, Kuhler and Stevens, were called in primarily to dress up existing functional designs - not create new designs from the ground up.
Now, locomotives are designed in compliance with government dictates and look like "Bullet Trains" despite the fact that they are, for the most part, only used on short-haul commuter lines where speeds seldom exceed 60 mph. The color schemes are designed by the "Art-In-Transit Committee" to delight "The Collective" but, with few exceptions, look to be the product of a 3 year old with a box of Crayons.
The only objective test is the Test of Time. Do a Google search for "railroad poster art", the kind of stuff that Young People hang on dormitory and apartment walls, and see what examples of American railroad equipment you find.
Hint: You'll find little that was designed after 1958.
No problem with designing a locomotive for crashworthiness or aerodynamics. Perhaps we just don't have any industrial designers with taste these days.
"The color schemes are designed by the "Art-In-Transit Committee" to delight "The Collective" but, with few exceptions, look to be the product of a 3 year old with a box of Crayons" 
It's as if everything has to be the antithesis of Pullman Green.
TurtleLinez posted:
Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and this beholder finds no beauty in the above locomotive. For me this loco is just another generic "plain jane".
Call me old fashioned, but the design & styling lines of an EMD E unit, F unit, or Alco PA still grabs my eye, holds my attention, and illicits my WOW factor!! Thank the stars I model the transition era of railroading history .... so many wonderful and interesting ( at least to me ) locomotive designs to include on my railroad 
This is the great thing about our hobby .... there are enough kinds and designs of trains for all of us to find our joy and beauty in model railroading!! We all can have and enjoy our own unique blended cup of tea! :-)
trumptrain posted:Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and this beholder finds no beauty in the above locomotive. For me this loco is just another generic "plain jane".
Call me old fashioned, but the design & styling lines of an EMD E unit, F unit, or Alco PA still grabs my eye, holds my attention, and illicits my WOW factor!!
Meanwhile, back in the olden daze, the comment was: "Diesels--- They all look alike."
Rusty
""The color schemes are designed by the "Art-In-Transit Committee" to delight "The Collective" but, with few exceptions, look to be the product of a 3 year old with a box of Crayons" "
Well, it is very easy for so many to jump on the "UGLY" band wagon isn't it!
Personally, I like it much better than the GE passenger locos. And the paint scheme is not bad. It reminds me of a spinner dolphin.
What I do find ugly is running "Hi-cube" passenger cars behind such a sleek looking locomotive.
