The Worst Thing To Ever Run On The Network

[Clayton]

Not sure it’s worth mentioning this unit or that, they all seem much of a muchness

 

[TRAX]

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Cycloped, the horse-powered locomotive that failed miserably at the Rainhill Trials in 1829:

Now *this* is something I’d happily ride on (along with Electrostars and the Duchess of Cambridge).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Class 141 has to be a contender for the worst dmu

142s worse... at least the 141s had character*, and didn't outstay their welcome unlike their younger brothers!

*=on second thoughts, that may just be nostalgia talking!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

My pet hate with 142's (other than the shoddy build) is that the bottom heating duct at the side of the window seats slopes in such a way that you cannot rest your foot on it. The 144's have a square box section which is ideal to rest a foot on. The 144's are by far and away the best pacers.

Agree with this... though in my case it isn't a foot, but a cup of coffee!

 

[keith1879]

NBL diesels were Classes 21, 22 and 29 (the latter being re-engined 21s). Class 24s were Sulzers, mostly built by BR.

The "Fell" diesel, 10100 was pretty unreliable. And from the passengers' viewpoint, we would have been better without all the Pacer-related designs.

Some of the 1st generation dmus built by Clayton were also dire - everything that could rattle seemed to rattle. They cured the rattling in later Clayton dmus, but these had Rolls Royce engines, and seemed to be a bit fire-prone.

Can't believe I made such a stupid mistake! Thanks for correcting it without further comment I'm off to revise my early diesel classes (I'm actually in the process of building a model of a Class 24 Derby/Sulzer right now - how stupid can I get?)

 

[woodhouse122]

Of the current stock my personal choice would be the 153 ,No Legroom and in a rush hour on a packed out single car they are horrible (Try riding one between Lincoln central and Peterborough after 4pm and ypu'll understand )

 

[alangla]

153's have the ability to turn a two carriage sardine can into a three carriage pleasure to travel on. They are wonderful for that reason.

You are Alex Hynes AICMFP

 

[martin2345uk]

Now *this* is something I’d happily ride on (along with Electrostars and the Duchess of Cambridge).

I don't know much about locos, but I really hope there is one called the Duchess of Cambridge!

 

[krus_aragon]

I don't know much about locos, but I really hope there is one called the Duchess of Cambridge!

Not on this list...
There has been one named "Duke of Cambridge" (1898, withdrawn 1912), but this Duke's private marriage was not recognised by the state, so his wife never held the title of Duchess.

 

[route:oxford]

I'm going to say the Class 166.

Cramped sweatboxes. Should have been 5 car with the same seating as Scotrail 170s and working air conditioning.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I'm surprised that given their reliability issues no one has mentioned the class 180s.

 

[route:oxford]

I'm surprised that given their reliability issues no one has mentioned the class 180s.

If you are sat in a 180 coach with the engine switched off, it's a very pleasant experience.

 

[TRAX]

I don't know much about locos, but I really hope there is one called the Duchess of Cambridge!

I believe there isn’t one.

 

[duffield]

Never been on it, but the Parry people mover looks sad

I think they're fun. Tiny little mini-trains running up and down a tiny branch line. I've been on them and they make me smile. Ride quality appalling but that's the track condition and it doesn't matter when you're only on for a few minutes.

 

[randyrippley]

...........................Some of the 1st generation dmus built by Clayton were also dire - everything that could rattle seemed to rattle. They cured the rattling in later Clayton dmus, but these had Rolls Royce engines, and seemed to be a bit fire-prone.

What units would they be? I'm not aware of Clayton building DMU's

 

[randyrippley]

..........................I'm actually in the process of building a model of a Class 24 Derby/Sulzer right now - how stupid can I get?)

yeah, you'd be better off building something more interesting.......

 

[keith1879]

yeah, you'd be better off building something more interesting.......

I know .....you start these things and ........

 

[ChiefPlanner]

BR Park Royal DMU

 

[ijmad]

I hate Class 153.

Ugly noisy rail busses.

 

[DidcotDickie]

Fun thread this, got me thinking while cleaning the bathrooms this afternoon

I've confined my views to trains I've actually travelled on rather than those which were clearly lemons like many of the Modernisation Plan diesel locos. I've also split it between Old and Modern as old trains clearly wouldn't be seen as fit for purpose today, though were when introduced. So:

Old

DMU - Cravens class 105 by a long mile. Awful things, no other first generation DMU rattled like them or rode so badly.

EMU - VEP (Not REP as previously written!) - awful Eastleigh design little changed from when carriages first acquired roofs to protect passengers from the elements. The LMS and LNER had shown the Southern how to build a modern inner-suburban EMU before WWII, it wouldn't have been too difficult to develop the concept for an outer suburban one. And Eastleigh was still turning out this rubbish even when the AM10s were introduced (which still had slam doors!).

Loco - like many here I was going to nominate the class 31, but that's probably a little unfair. If you were unlucky to have one on one of the Harwich boat trains with 12 mark 1's behind they were useless - down to walking pace at the top of Brentwood bank. But hauling six mark ones on a Birmingham-Cambridge deputising for the asthmatic class 120 usually assigned to the job they were more than fit for purpose and even quite sprightly by comparison. And the mark 1 compo was luxury compared to the purgatory of a Cravens which you ended up on if you had to change at Peterborough.

Modern

DMU - I've only done a few journeys on a Pacer and found them rather fun - in a fairground sense - but I fully sympathise with people who have to use them every day. Worst modern DMU for me has to be the Cross Country Voyager - too few coaches and rubbish interior layout. Rip the insides out, properly refurbish with decent seats, sensible loos, get rid of the smell of poo and you might have a decent class 170 replacement for routes like Cardiff-Nottingham and Birmingham-Stansted.

EMU - I'm racking my brains on this. I see people are slating the 700s. I've done a few trips to Gatwick on these and found them OK (it was off-peak). They're clearly designed as people-movers and the passenger environment is what I'd expect. Seats aren't brilliant but then I don't mind a firm seat - I actually like the 387s and 800s on the GWML . I guess for me the worst EMU is the 321, though it's been a while since I had one on the GE. But there again, the unrefurbished ones are past their sell-by date and the interior is a bit old and tired (like me )

Loco - no idea, rarely do any loco-hauled travel these days other than the occasional excursion and they're usually hauled by kettles.

 

[yorksrob]

I would humbly like to nominate any/all hand dryers. I've yet to find one on a train that works.

 

[yorksrob]

Fun thread this, got me thinking while cleaning the bathrooms this afternoon

I've confined my views to trains I've actually travelled on rather than those which were clearly lemons like many of the Modernisation Plan diesel locos. I've also split it between Old and Modern as old trains clearly wouldn't be seen as fit for purpose today, though were when introduced. So:

Old

DMU - Cravens class 105 by a long mile. Awful things, no other first generation DMU rattled like them or rode so badly.

EMU - REP - awful Eastleigh design little changed from when carriages first acquired roofs to protect passengers from the elements. The LMS and LNER had shown the Southern how to build a modern inner-suburban EMU before WWII, it wouldn't have been too difficult to develop the concept for an outer suburban one. And Eastleigh was still turning out this rubbish even when the AM10s were introduced (which still had slam doors!).

Loco - like many here I was going to nominate the class 31, but that's probably a little unfair. If you were unlucky to have one on one of the Harwich boat trains with 12 mark 1's behind they were useless - down to walking pace at the top of Brentwood bank. But hauling six mark ones on a Birmingham-Cambridge deputising for the asthmatic class 120 usually assigned to the job they were more than fit for purpose and even quite sprightly by comparison. And the mark 1 compo was luxury compared to the purgatory of a Cravens which you ended up on if you had to change at Peterborough.

Modern

DMU - I've only done a few journeys on a Pacer and found them rather fun - in a fairground sense - but I fully sympathise with people who have to use them every day. Worst modern DMU for me has to be the Cross Country Voyager - too few coaches and rubbish interior layout. Rip the insides out, properly refurbish with decent seats, sensible loos, get rid of the smell of poo and you might have a decent class 170 replacement for routes like Cardiff-Nottingham and Birmingham-Stansted.

EMU - I'm racking my brains on this. I see people are slating the 700s. I've done a few trips to Gatwick on these and found them OK (it was off-peak). They're clearly designed as people-movers and the passenger environment is what I'd expect. Seats aren't brilliant but then I don't mind a firm seat - I actually like the 387s and 800s on the GWML . I guess for me the worst EMU is the 321, though it's been a while since I had one on the GE. But there again, the unrefurbished ones are past their sell-by date and the interior is a bit old and tired (like me )

Loco - no idea, rarely do any loco-hauled travel these days other than the occasional excursion and they're usually hauled by kettles.

Give me a decent Eastleigh slammer over crummy sliding door rubbish any day.

 

[Cowley]

Two stroke engine.

Paxman (as fitted to the class 17s) make four stroke engines. Crossley (as fitted to Metro-Vic class 28s) made 2 strokes.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Paxman (as fitted to the class 17s) make four stroke engines. Crossley (as fitted to Metro-Vic class 28s) made 2 strokes.

Is the class 28 fully restored?

 

[507021]

My pet hate with 142's (other than the shoddy build) is that the bottom heating duct at the side of the window seats slopes in such a way that you cannot rest your foot on it. The 144's have a square box section which is ideal to rest a foot on. The 144's are by far and away the best pacers.

Yeah, I think the 144s are the best Pacers too.

 

[Cowley]

Is the class 28 fully restored?

No Angela. Hopefully we won’t have to wait too long for it’s second coming though...

 

[delt1c]

NBL diesels were Classes 21, 22 and 29 (the latter being re-engined 21s). Class 24s were Sulzers, mostly built by BR.

The "Fell" diesel, 10100 was pretty unreliable. And from the passengers' viewpoint, we would have been better without all the Pacer-related designs.

Some of the 1st generation dmus built by Clayton were also dire - everything that could rattle seemed to rattle. They cured the rattling in later Clayton dmus, but these had Rolls Royce engines, and seemed to be a bit fire-prone.

Do you mean Cravens? Vibrators on rails

 

[70014IronDuke]

The 31s have earned their money several times over. ...

Indeed. At least, once they were re-engined, they met their original spec admirably. People on here who suggest 31s and 40s need to get a reality check. Of course, by the 1980s these locomotives were clearly showing the weaknesses of 1950s' design and technical limitations, but to suggest they were the worst locomotives to run on the railway is nonsense.
Someone suggested this is a fun thread. It's bilge.

 

[Cowley]

Spot on Iron Duke.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the class 56s that were built in Romania. I can just about remember seeing them at Barrow Hill waiting to receive modifications in the mid 1970s.