Classic Traction which never aged

[Fleetwood Boy]

The flat nose designs of the 1960s were mandated by the Design Panel. Either the class 37 design was finalised much earlier in the design process than the other 1960 designs before the panel could intercede, or someone decided economy of scale in sharing doors and other bits with the class 40 was more important than styling. The Design Panel were able to force the switch from the Deltic body of DP2 to the class 50 flat front

I'm sure I read somewhere that BR wanted a new-style front end for the EE Type 3 but English Electric offered such a good price for the design based on the EE Type 4 that BR would have been daft to refuse?

 

[OuterDistant]

I'm struggling to grasp why BR switched to flat fronted cabs, given that locos with noses seemed to fare much better in accidents. If you compare something like the Lunan Bay (1975) and Glasgow (1977) accidents - both class 40s - with something like Crewe (1980) or Micheldever (1985), a 47 or a 33 seems a bit of a death trap in terms of the damage sustained. Not to mention the great big whack that DP2 took in 1967, already mentioned.

Was the additional visibility really worth the much higher risk of the cab being crushed and its occupants killed?

 

[bramling]

Agreed.

They certainly don’t look “old” compared to 319s, even though their production was only a couple of years or so apart.

Ironically, the return to recessed doors and large windows makes a class 700 resemble a 317/319/321 from the side.

I've already heard people comment on GN wondering "where have our new trains gone?" when a 700 rocks up on what was previously a 365 or 387 service.

I'm sure the front end of a 700 will look horribly dated in time, although to be fair few train front ends stand the test of time.

 

[randyrippley]

I'm struggling to grasp why BR switched to flat fronted cabs, given that locos with noses seemed to fare much better in accidents. If you compare something like the Lunan Bay (1975) and Glasgow (1977) accidents - both class 40s - with something like Crewe (1980) or Micheldever (1985), a 47 or a 33 seems a bit of a death trap in terms of the damage sustained. Not to mention the great big whack that DP2 took in 1967, already mentioned.

Was the additional visibility really worth the much higher risk of the cab being crushed and its occupants killed?

The change appears to have simply been a desire to improve the aesthetics of the locomotives. Nothing to do with visibility. Flat fronts look neater.
Late 50's early 60's BR/BRB/BTC spent a lot of time and money on "image" in the sense of visual enhancements. That covered the new blue standard delivery, and the styling of the rolling stock.

 

[pdeaves]

The change appears to have simply been a desire to improve the aesthetics of the locomotives. Nothing to do with visibility. Flat fronts look neater.

Interestingly, buses and lorries used to have 'bonnets' out front but they, too have disappeared.

 

[hexagon789]

Interestingly, buses and lorries used to have 'bonnets' out front but they, too have disappeared.

A lot of American Diesel locos (mainly freight) still have big chunky noses.

 

[pdeaves]

A lot of American Diesel locos (mainly freight) still have big chunky noses.

and lorries. Perhaps I should have specified UK!

 

[hexagon789]

and lorries. Perhaps I should have specified UK!

Actually it think you did, hence why I specified American locos. There are still plenty of "nosey" 37s about on the UK network though as well of course, so we still have "nosey" trains in service - so to speak!

 

[randyrippley]

Interestingly, buses and lorries used to have 'bonnets' out front but they, too have disappeared.

Forward cab design maximises the payload length for the vehicle length - and in a bus allows OMO