Why do locos all look so different?

[richieb1971]

In the past 50 or 60 years there have been so many types of locos. But one thing that sticks out to me is that the insides are usually very similar in design, but the outsides are very different.

Even locos where there are similarities like the class 44, 45 and 46.. there are still differences between the original yellow ends.

I do realize that in modern times the class 58 window setup is desired.. Hence the 59, 66 following in its wake.

So why does a 24, 25, 26 and 27 all have very different cab ends? Surely it could have been standardized?

 

[TheEdge]

So why does a 24, 25, 26 and 27 all have very different cab ends? Surely it could have been standardized?

Design development. The 25 was a development of the 24 so there were probably lessons learnt that were put into the 25. Likewise the 27 was a development of the 26. Also different builders and designers. The 24 and 25 were in-house BR homebrews whereas the 26 and 27s were built by BRCW.

Same sort of reason an Electrostar looks different to the Desiro. Units built at a similar time for a similar purpose but by different builders to different developments.

 

[GM228]

In the past 50 or 60 years there have been so many types of locos. But one thing that sticks out to me is that the insides are usually very similar in design, but the outsides are very different.

Even locos where there are similarities like the class 44, 45 and 46.. there are still differences between the original yellow ends.

I do realize that in modern times the class 58 window setup is desired.. Hence the 59, 66 following in its wake.

So why does a 24, 25, 26 and 27 all have very different cab ends? Surely it could have been standardized?

The same would apply to the motor industry!

 

[jopsuk]

They look different because the designers, where feasible, take a bit of pride in their work and want to create something distinctive.

Even if that looks like a garden shed...

 

[Julia]

Design development. The 25 was a development of the 24 so there were probably lessons learnt that were put into the 25.

Plus, various distinctive external features - headcode discs, end doors, tablet-catchers - became obsolete and fell out of use between (or even during) production runs; obviously there's no need to pay for things that you know are never going to be used. Conversely, on older examples there's no need to pay to remove things that are obsolete but essentially harmless.

 

[DarloRich]

i don't get the point of this thread. Am i missing more than normal? Surely designs vary from class to class as the designers try to meet the needs of the client. I am confused.

IS there a suggestion that we should have a standardised design for all locomotives?

 

[MK Tom]

Wow, imagine a world where every train looked the same, or every car, or every house. Sounds like a bleak Orwellian world to me!

I'd say classes 24-27 all look very similar despite coming from different builders. Except for how some 25s have the full centre window as cab front doors became an outmoded concept.

If there is a visible difference between classes 44, 45 and 46 I've yet to spot it.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Wow, imagine a world where every train looked the same, or every car, or every house. Sounds like a bleak Orwellian world to me!

I'd say classes 24-27 all look very similar despite coming from different builders. Except for how some 25s have the full centre window as cab front doors became an outmoded concept.

If there is a visible difference between classes 44, 45 and 46 I've yet to spot it.

Some had split headcode boxes, some had central ones, some had none at all- much like 37s.

On the wider subject, my father and my uncle grew up with the end of steam, and they always comment on how "diesels all look the same" whereas myself and my brother grew up with end of widespread LHCS services and always felt that most kettles look very similar.

 

[RichmondCommu]

The HST looked like nothing else for two reasons; running at 125 mph with a conventional cab design wouldn't have been ideal and secondly BR wanted the HST to have a distinctive design to help market its revolutionary Intercity services.

Nowadays looks are no longer important for two reasons. In my experience the traveling public are now a lot more cynical about rail travel and a fancy design doesn't impress anyone. Secondly the Intercity service in this country is actually very good and in reality the new Hitachi trains are simply replacing old trains as a opposed to revolutionizing Intercity travel so a distinctive design is not required.

In short rail users don't really care what the train looks like. A good barometer here are my daughters. Clever, bright girls who use the train to get to and from Uni, visit friends etc but who couldn't careless what the train looked like. In fact I don't think they pay it any attention whatsoever. If I asked my eldest daughter if she'd traveled home from Nottingham in a HST she wouldn't have the faintest idea. My youngest son can identify a HST but wouldn't have a clue what a class 66 looks like. And yet getting on for 40 years a go the Intercity 125 aka HST was a house hold name.

Just a last thought, my in laws who mostly live in Lancashire know what a Pendolino is and can recognize one a mile off because prior to their introduction Virgin used the trains to market the new improved service. On the other end of the scale they also know about the Pacer for all the wrong reasons because of all the bad publicity that they attract.

 

[TheNewNo2]

IS there a suggestion that we should have a standardised design for all locomotives?

I assume that this design would be a rebuild of a class 442?

 

[455driver]

If there is a visible difference between classes 44, 45 and 46 I've yet to spot it.

Basically-
44s had headcode discs.
45s had boxes or split centre headcodes and 2 side grilles covered.
46s had single piece centre plus crosses on the battery boxes, they also had all side grilles open.

This refers to as built condition, after overhauls started it all got a bit mixed up.

 

[richieb1971]

I was not suggesting that locos should be all the same. Just wondering why new designs change so drastically. Ultimately a diesel or electric locomotive needs a shell. It doesn't matter what it looks like.. but for some reason, all locos look very different.

 

[Bald Rick]

Similarly, why do all the different models of cars, planes, buses etc from the 50s and 60s look different?

 

[ComUtoR]

Similarly, why do all the different models of cars, planes, buses etc from the 50s and 60s look different?

Back then people cared how the car looked and design was important. There was a drive to be different.

With modern cars they have become very homogenized. Performance and gadgets have far exceeded the shell design and components are shared across the industry. With the parent company owning many sub brands shared components and using the same designer across brands has also led to the new generic car design.

I'd also like to consider if the introduction of safety has also made designs very generic. I'd love a beautifully curved chrome bumper but I doubt that would pass ncap