The most crappiest or pathetic locos in this country.

May have been the rebuilds then. I'm sure I heard that some class was based on the Nellies. Just can't remeber where I heard it from. It may have been a book or video.

 

The Southern sent a set of Lord Nelson drawings to North British in Glasgow, where most of the design of the Royal Scots was undertaken but with some input from the LMS. The main part included in the new design seems to be the boiler, but the chassis was very different, with three instead of four cylinders. Of course, when the time came to rebuild the Scots, the main item to be dispensed with was the boiler.

 

Cheers for that sounds about right.

 

Would 6399 Fury count as useless ?

 

Not totally, its bits were used to build 6170 British Legion

 

I would say the un-rebuilt bullied locos simple because they are very over complicated, unreliable and it everything is hard to access (coming from someone who has spent way too long working on 34007). A pathetic loco would be the lord nelson class, they hardly make any noise!

 

I agree, bullied locos are rubbish but BULLEID locos are fantastic and this is coming from someone who has spent 35 years restoring and looking after one.

 

Im going to upset a few people here, but if Spam Cans were so good, then why did BR embark on the rebuilding programme ?.

 

Just to **** that 'smarty pants' Bulleid off by all accounts....

 

Sorry I didn't realise my spelling mistake, Bulleids are like the marmite of locos. And the rebuilt engines are actually quite good.

 

I don't knowwhy some were rebuilt but some are a mixed bag in reliability I'd admit. 34067, 21C123 have had problems and sounds like 34007 is in a bad way but I'd say that some like 34081, 34072, 34070, 34105 seem to have had good reliability. I do love Bulleids even the Q1 and I was intrigued by the Leader Class though.

 

They were outshining the BR Standards so had to be detuned/hobbled to make the Riddles machines look good.

 

I knew there was a conspiracy theory in there somewhere...

 

It seems that the Bulleid rebuilding program was an even bigger conspiracy than the assassination of JFK!

 

Hmmm... Repton puts in good work on the NYMR, which is not exactly flat. Although I think she had problems early on, once she was mechanically fit, and the drivers had sorted out the right technique, she became a "really useful engine".

As for the Q1, we have a saying in the south: "handsome is, as handsome does". Using that critereon, the Q1 is handsome!

 

Incidentally, I quite like Marmite...

 

I love the stuff.

 

I maintain that this thread is silly and pointless. After further consideration however, that does not mean it can't be a bit of fun

So, engines that are 'crappy' or 'pathetic' - well engines are all horses for courses, different pros, different cons...I'm loath to really say any loco is 'bad', but I suppose currently the winner for me would have to be...

6100. And that does not mean that it will be crappy or pathetic for all time, or that I'm making dark comments about whoever restored it - the fact is a few years ago there it was and, to be honest, it was a bit pants.

Lessons from history - the prototype 0-6-2T 5600 (which as I recall broke in the first 100 yards of its maiden voyage due to a fantastic oversight in design and manufacture), ANYTHING Brunel designed, and of course the infamous Leader - it is a shame Bulleid did not have a strong head draughtsman to reign him in, and make workable solutions of his undoubtedly forward thinking ideas. Of course, the years in which he was working did not help. Imagine if Hawksworth and Bulleid had both got their CE positions in, say, 1935...?

 

A second Swindon Pacific?....Hopefully more useful than the first one

Wasn't it the lack of a motion bracket and that the motion just become one big mess very quickly.

 

Although this loco is a 'Leading' contender for the Most Crappiest or Pathetic Cup I would love it if somebody built a replica!