ITT: ugly train/bus/tram/plane etc
Pic: midland metro
>>849122
>someone thought this styling was a good idea
I'm kind of torn on the Glasgow Subway stock, don't know if they look kawaii or retarded.
>>849122
>>849757
>>850822
You boys sure aren't trying very hard.
>>850822
Great livery but nasty shape.
< Parry people mover abomination
>>850825
That is awful.
>>850827
Oh my lawdy, can't believe I've never heard of this!
Alsothey are going all out here:
http://www.parrypeoplemovers.com/pdf/PPM120INFO.pdf
>>850827
that pic, train included, looks comfy as fuck
>>850827
Everything about that thing, livery included, is horrible. It's just so sad, pathetic, and nasty. That station looks cozy as fuck though.
>>850918
Fiat Multipla of the rails.
Pic: optare solo, I will never get used to it
>>850827
Jesus Christ, I´d be ashamed if I had to commute in this Teletubbie tram. As somebody above said, everything about it is awfull.
In my city they used üic related for some time in the 1970, a decade where recreational use of psychodelic drugs was common. That is probably the best explanation for this weird assymetric citybus thing, build by the (normally respectable ) austrian vehicle producer Steyr. Just look at it, its like somebody wielded a selfbuild passenger compartment ontpo an early multicar.
>>850825
Fuck, it's like the manufacturer just slapped on whatever was in the parts bin and didn't even try to make it fit.
The later Soviet trollybuses have that special "Fuck you we're Communists" look to them.
>>851099
I think they tried to go for a routemaster style there, with the engine next to the drivers cab. It's actually quite a good set up but why do it for such a small vehicle?
< Siemens new London Underground mockup. Thank god this design was scrapped.
>>850822
They're so tiny. It trips me up being in a subway car smaller than the average bus.
Strasbourg was the harbinger of 2nd generation tramways, but damn those cars are ugly.
I'm not a big fan of that kind of ultralow floor "20 km/h Shinkansen" looks.
>>850822
Well you can't have it any other way really, it's 11 ft tunnel for christ sake. The nose must be flat too because the trains are what moves air in the tunnels.
This is the worst train. Everyone in the Bay doesn't want construction in their backyard so it's always overloaded.
>>851366
Raked windscreen so the pedestrians & cyclists just bounce right off!
México city metro
>>851370
>BART
>worst
The cars are clean and the police usually patrol the stations enough to clear out homeless people. It's only overloaded during commute hours like all trains too.
>>851366
>that much glass
Do they want to fry the driver?
>>851155
at least it isn't russian
I hate these, also they're more uncomfortable than the 40 year old units.
Hoping that the shitty airport-rail link would at least look half decent.
It looks like someone threw up over it holy fuck.
>>851366
I don't think it's that ugly to be honest. It looks quite sci fi from the side. The biggest issue is the headlamp shape and green front.
>>851370
>>851393
Asymmetrical trains tend not to look very good.
>>851586
It looks like the got a design for a narrower gauge and stretched it out by placing the components at random larger distances apart, before painting it in the worst livery possible.
<Brand new Wright StreetDeck, how did they create such a terrible front end?
>>850827
Reminds me of this
MCI G-series. Ugly inside and out
>Looks like a Fisher-Price toy
>Liked to catch on fire
>So poorly designed that the factories couldn't assemble them properly and had to fudge it
>Bankrupted Greyhound and got them bought by FirstGroup
>>851655
The more I look the worse it gets.
< Class 460 Gatwick Express units, terrible looking
>>851661
They were great trains though, I'm so glad they were replaced by the pigs said nobody ever, 442's=BAD NEWS.
Also that luggage carriage in your pic, a fucking luggage carriage on a modern train, those were the days.
They now look pretty tight converted to 458's IMO, check it out for yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0NAzFJZfaI
>>851370
I actually consider that one of the most beautiful trains I know.
>>850929
about 11 years ago there was a bus company down wiltshire way, tried to sell those things for £1 each as they were that terrible, and still no one bought one.
>>851370
>Everyone in the Bay doesn't want construction in their backyard
bit of a tangent: sometimes I wish the municipal government had the power to say "suck it, thousands more will benefit from this" when it comes to infrastructure construction. the Bay Area (the whitest parts, anyway) tend to be the worst of the worst NIMBYers.
>>851155
commie shit is pretty comfy
>>851450
Modern day trains tend to be uncomfortable. In 20 years in germany we had downgrade after downgrade. Rock bottom isn't far away anymore
>>851869
The local governments do have that power though. Except they put all their money into Caltrain's EIR and HSR (both of which are an overhaul of the state's rail system, especially in the bay area, tri-valley and sacramento metro area).
The issue is that BART more or less works as is, so they're focusing on service improvements rather than capital upgrades (like, more track). This is especially true when they have to replace most of their rolling stock within the next decade which is a massive cost. But BART is expanding, they're getting both a San Jose and Antioch extension. The goal is to move traffic off Amtrak California so that A/C can focus on tri-valley and HSR service.
Most of the Bay Area is pro HSR mind you. Just not the really rich area between Mountain View and Burlingame. But their efforts at killing the plan have so far failed as both SF and SJ have more money than them.
>>851370
>nimby
Kill them all with fire
>>851370
Could you imagine opposing water or gas mains or a fire station or a hospital
Or god forbid in the land of the free, a freeway
>>851997
Why is it even split between several local governments that seems grossly inefficient
>>852013
Politics, basically.
Amtrak California began service in 1976 along with regular Amtrak. They focused on providing intercity service between Sacramento, Oakland and San Jose as Southern Pacific continue private commuter service between San Francsico and San Jose until 1989 when it was bought out by Western Pacific. Caltrain is operated by the four counties it serves on the peninsula rail board, while A/C is run by CADOT.
As for BART, it began service in 1972, just a year after Amtrak proper was created. From the start it was supposed to be an SF subway system, a replacement for the east bay key system and prehaps HSR. However, the latter never materialized as Amtrak was created and took over Intercity service. A/C was created a few years later, along with Caltrain in 1990 ACE in 1991.
Thus, you have six passenger rail systems (Amtrak, A/C, ACE, Caltrain, BART, SMART) in the bay area run by separate agencies as well as two light rail systems (MUNI, VTA) and two freight rail systems (UP and BNSF). It is a giant clusterfuck, but it works more or less as each system can configure itself to it's individual needs. Really only ACE is redundant, which is why it'll consolidate with A/C around 2025 or so when phase 2 of the HSR plan begins.
>>852024
Also, Amtrak is run by DC and BART is run by the five or six counties it serves. SMART is run by the two or three counties it serves too.
It may seem silly not to have centralized control, but it seriously just werks. Caltrain has different priorities than BART or ACE, as does the new SMART system in the north bay. A/C and Amtrak proper have their own priorities as well.
>>850822
I love the Glasgow Underground but the livery could be better.
>>850827
Parry People Moves could see the revival of smaller branchlines and urban railways, so don't mock it. It could be our savior.
>>851194
Not an actual train, only a concept. But it's basically made to go "HERP DERP FEWTURE" to people. I hope it's not the end design.
>>851366
STFU those are sexy as fuck
The Australian Wombat has dung that look like cubes. Apparently this was a big inspiration for the designers of early Tyne & Wear Metro rollingstock.
>>849122
>Not an actual train, only a concept. But it's basically made to go "HERP DERP FEWTURE" to people. I hope it's not the end design.
I did say it was only a mockup, and it isn't the final design. Here is what it will actually look similar to: https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/the-future-of-the-tube/new-tube-for-london
< Look at this monstrosity
The Los Angeles Metro Siemens units are hideous.
>>851997
>Most of the Bay Area is pro HSR mind you
was there a poll for this at some point? I lived in Mountain View briefly when I still used to do contract gigs, and my impression was that they were some of the fiercest NIMBYers I've met in my life.
>>852867
That stock is hardly ugly at all, in fact it's pretty good looking.
>>851194
>IN THE FUTURE LONDONERS WILL GO TO WORK IN A FLESHLIGHT!
The Desiro 380s look like absolute trash.
>>849122
No GE class 70 posted yet...
>>852906
>>850827
Where's the train goddamnit!
>>851984
Eh, those older Skoda & ZIU trollybuses have jerky acceleration because of the old resistor bank controllers and almost zero EMF feedback control, so they're not particularly comfortable to travel on if you're standing.
>>849122
Pretty bland "futuristik" design.
>>851099
Not bad. If it was a bit longer and more massive, would be nicer. Bonus points if the driver enters from the back or something.
>>851194
The Tube now dubbed The Plug.
>The Future
Pathetic.
>>851370
Looks like something straight outta 1970's "futuristic designs" handibook.
>>851393
This is hilarious.
>>852906
What the fuck?
Sorry for this long ass pointless post. Felt like sharing.
>>851608
>Wright StreetDeck
I used to work for Wrightbus on the assembly line for about a year after I'd finished University.
>>853005
What an experience. They always seem to have trouble when it comes to designs. The only decent design they've done is the NBfL, and that was designed by Heatherwick studios.
>>853227
What did you expect from a bunch of lads from Ballymena? they're the sort of people who turn up to a school formal in a tractor instead of a Limo.
>>852978
>Looks like something straight outta 1970's "futuristic designs" handibook.
Well it was designed in the 60s.
>>853239
That's some Shinkansen clone right there
Also, ja.wikipedia apparently hints at the fugly bart design being "inspired" by the Eidan 6000
>>853239
>Well it was designed in the 60s.
It was well ahead of its times.
>>852922
Took way too long for this to be posted...
>>852888
>Mountain View
the southwest bay (ie, everything from Sunnyvale up to Milbrae) is the only part against HSR. The east bay, SJ itself, and SF are all pro HSR.
>>852884
Metrolink has been on the slide since 2008. Their current director doesn't have much vision and wasn't so hot to jump onto the HSR.
Mind you, up north Caltrain immediately jumped on the HSR project and managed to piggyback off it for their own upgrade. Metrolink still isn't certain if the HSR is able to even make it to Union Station in downtown LA, or if it'll stop at Burbank instead. Meanwhile ridership has stagnated (as opposed to grown in all the bay area rail agencies) and they're at a loss for what to do as they keep getting cockblocked by all the small towns there.
The most clearest example I can think of, is that in the bay area Caltrain owns all the stations on their ROW (sans the Salesforce Terminal and Dirdion station which are owned by Salesforce and CADOT). But down in LA all the local cities own the stations themselves if I'm not mistaken.
It's just a mess. Caltrain is lucky as they only have to serve a single corridor, same with ACE and A/C. They can thus devote more cash to making their fleets just werk and play local politics much better compared to an organization like Metrolink that has to operate 2-3 corridors through a massive area.
>>853627
Probably $ and cleaning too. The first batch of CAF trams borrowed from Spain in Sydney had hard plastic seats and a really, really awful. The second bunch bought for keeps was an improvement but the seats while fabric were nothing but a paper thin layer stretched over 1mm of foam
For deep cleans, properly padded seats can be difficult. Ever tried smacking your palm on one a few times and noticed all the bits of skin dust coming out?
The ones bought for keeps are the same model as the OP, just different livery
>>853637
So it's really just the livery which makes the Midland Metro look shit.
I have always wondered about hygiene on public transport, here in the UK seats are cloth moquette probably 99% of the time on trams/buses/trains, and are only washed every 15 years if you're lucky. In london it's a little better as buses are replaced or refurbed on a 7 year cycle, but then again the old buses end up all around the country and you will find examples of ancient seats with decades of use. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irWUvF65qpc
>>853627
It's just modern standards for high density, squeezing more passengers into a smaller space, and saving money. Probably an element to prevent people sleeping too.
>>853745
The situation with deep cleaning is similar all round. I think Sydney had the first one for the trains in 20 years or something a couple of years ago. When they applied the high pressure hose to the seats, a black sludge oozed out
One of the things about moquette is that it's usually designed multipurpose. It's a carpet that you just happen to sit on. It's generally knife resistant and normally has patterns to hide graffiti, and coloured to hide all the shit that gets on it
Also, whilst the rest of the train looks alright, I've always found the face of the TGV Eurostar on its own to be really ugly
>>853749
Eurostars always look good from a distance, I like the headlamps but the windscreen shape isn't great.
>>849122
Networker Turbo
DesignLine EcoSaver IV. The MTA used these as test buses for a while, in 2009.
New trains for the stockholm metro, ugly as fuck imo
![About-to-take-on-the-one-mile-straight-960x397[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/8R7NTFm.jpg "About-to-take-on-the-one-mile-straight-960x397[1].jpg")
>>853921
Reminds me of the Metrodecker. Optare, never fails to make excruciatingly bad looking buses.
pretty much any modern britfag train tbh
or anything with buffer and chain coupling
>>853967
>"haha buffers so old"
>USA railways closer to steam era than rest of world in 1970
>>853627
It's mostly miniaturization and power efficiency, using less material to make a stiffer train. Old trains were heavy and inefficient, making them more forgiving about nicks in the rail.
>>854122
electric trains use 1890s tech, modern diesel-electrics didn't exist until the 1960s and 70s
>>854241
>what is an IGBT
>>853807
I've always pictured them in my mind as having happy anime style faces, better than a lot of the old BREL stock from the front IMO.
>>854241
Why don't we start running power stations on diesel? It's more modern than coal and steam turbine technology after all.
>>854944
Something about the 465 and 466 makes them look alright. I think the diesel networkers have the most issues with looks.
>>854955
40% of America's enegy is coal, another 40% is natural gas. The remaining 20% is divided between solar, wind and nuclear power.
But your logic isn't exactly flawed. Biogas plants are definately something companies were looking into a few years ago.
>>854965
All use the same system, superheated steam propelling generators. The point being that electricity is more efficient than individual diesel generators on each locomotive. But despite that, having diesel is not what makes rail in the US closer to the steam era than other developed countries 1970.
>>854241
>swallowing the bait, yeah...
So, in 1890 electric trains had basically two options for prime mover:
-Bruched DC motors with resistor bank controls and additional field retardation armature windings with carbon brush controller to switch between various serial / paraller configurations, armature windings and resistor banks. Was somewhat satisfactory and remained the standard until the 70s.
-Synchronous AC motors with mechanical transmission and possibly resistor bank for gear change (due the nature of synchronous motors, this generates too much heat to be applied continuously). This made the available speed range of the machines somewhat limited and many early locos had problems with jerky starts that tore down the loco or rolling stock.
After the invention of mercury restifier, universal motors became applicable and AC electric railroad became more viable, except in America who thought fuck it instead. This was indeed very good system as far as control goes, though efficiency of the universal motor left some desires.
Thyristors came in the 70s. AC locomotives no longer would need to carry around gallons of mercury and the improved switching speed would mean that DC machines could chuck their mechanical controller for chopper drive instead.
In the past decade we have seen the first succesful variable frequency drives utilizing induction motors, thanks to improved control technology (apparently it takes surprisingly much computing power).
So, we are at the 2000s at least. What's new you have in the diesels? Got rid of the journal boxes at least.
>>855195
and as a result diesel tech is cheaper
>>855222
Maybe so as far as trans-continental freight goes.
Variable frequency drive is, I think the pinnacle of what comes to traction technology in subways and streetcars: with direct drive induction motors you hardly can get the moving parts count much lower and the efficiency is hight too.
After this all the improvements left to be done concern current collection: how to get the price of catenaries down and linear induction motor tech ought to improve still so we could have a simpler, cheaper, more reliable ground level power supply systems for light rail.
I used to go to work in Birmingham and was fortunate enough to get one of London Midland's less shitty trains for the most part, but every morning, at about six o'clock, one of these things would come rumbling into the station in a cloud of black smoke and screech to a halt on platform 1. regular as clockwork, this absolute dinosaur would pull in and about five people would come out.
And then, about three months after I started working, I was out in a more remote station and my train was delayed due to an engine failure so LM put an "emergency train" on the track instead of the relatively luxurious diesel and lo and behold, two of these things arrive with their signature appalling noise and not only was the ride home dingily lit, cold, uncomfortable and noisy, it was about 20 minutes longer than usual.
I pity the poor saps who have to get this every day.
>>855616
>I pity the poor saps who have to get this every day.
It's better than a pacer, at least you have 4 wheel bogies on a 153.
>>855616
Why do you think people call them dogboxes? Luckily they're going to be scrapped when the new disability regulations kick in.
>>855623
Wait, people call these things dogboxes?
>>853928
the livery isn't too bad, shame about the front tho
>>855195
Past decade? Japan and Germany had variable frequency inverter driven AC motors in their trains and locomotives since the late 70s
>>854944
Shit I actually really like the networkers
>>855623
>Luckily they're going to be scrapped when the new disability regulations kick in.
Are they?
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/203767/class-153-pb-covering-letter.pdf
>>855862
Ah that is a shame. I really thought it was going to be impossible for them to get round that.
>>850827
At least you get a train.
Anything bigger would be too expansive and get discontinued.
It's ugly but well better than nothing.
>>850825
Probably some stupid rule forbidding tilted windows or something.
There just has to be some stupid rule behind that, it's aweful in every aspect...
>>851155
The door layout makes it ugly, but it is practical with many big doors and low entry, so stops can be kept short.
>>852922
>someone actually put effort into styling the front and ended up doing this...
Someone needs another job.
>>855076
This took too long to get posted.
>>856076
>It's ugly but well better than nothing.
I don't think having some decent styling would have increased the budget appeal the Parry People Mover has for operators.
![18lqbfz3tw4wijpg[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/X17yYLO.jpg "18lqbfz3tw4wijpg[1].jpg")
Almost everything about NYC's subway is hideous in every sense of the word.
>>856197
Nah fam shiny ribbed steel is aesthetic
>>856878
Is it not aluminium?
>>855738
>>853928
I have mixed feelings about this one.
>>857381
On the other hand, I like this one much, but people say it's not very pretty.
What say you /n/?
>>857386
Ugly, yes, but I kinda like it.
It's like a pug.
>>857386
Is that about early 2000s era variobahn?
These ones in helsinki look pretty OK but have had numerous technical problems. Might even be we discard/sell them in 2017 in just over 15 years of age when the current contract with Stadler ends.
>>857516
trams are feminine?
>>857614
Look at the OP image
>>857405
>early 2000s era variobahn?
No, that's the newest one we have in Warsaw and made by PESA company from Bydgoszcz.
>>855622
Fuck pacers
They're like holocaust trains
New filipino MRT train
It's ugly, it's made in china(which means infferior quality), the candy color looks tacky and cheap. But anything is welcomed considering the pathetic state of our metro service right now
Front view of the damn thing
Khazakhstan HSR train (mafe by alstom)
The ultimate duckface train
>>858441
That is terrible. Looks very cheap.
>>858440
>made by CNR Dalian
That's your problem right there. A better company would be CSR Zhuzhou. They've been bidding and bagging plenty of contracts worldwide
>>858476
I really don't trust Chinese vehicles. Yes, buy some parts from china, buy kitchens, toys, other simple things. But I don't trust the vehicles. I know they meet safety standards, but I feel there is a high chance of some other unexpected and very dangerous issues.
>>858477
I don't blame you. When it comes to complex mechanical systems you have to be able to trust the entire supply chain; all the way to the company who supplied the ball bearings. In China as it is now, that's basically impossible.
![Southern_Railway_Q1_class_0-6-0_No_33001_on_the_Bluebell_Line[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vy0hPIm.jpg "Southern_Railway_Q1_class_0-6-0_No_33001_on_the_Bluebell_Line[1].jpg")
Bulleid Q1
>>859256
Pretty much anything designed by Bulleid ever.
>>859258
Honestly just looks like an early electrostar
>>858477
I have always felt the same way.
TfGM's (sub-leased to First) School bus Optare Versa hybrids...just no...
>>863099
Really is the livery ruining it, the normal Arriva ones look decent.
>>850825
Hideous. It reminds me of this little Dutch disaster. It doesn't look like a train, and never worked like one. Anyone unfamiliar with the 'Fyra' debacle should read up - never trust Italians with your train order.
>>855844
Agreed, they seem pretty decent.
Class 365s, on the other hand, may be a contender...
>>864085
>V250 trainsets were delivered with a significant delay. Full commercial services with V250 started on December 9, 2012 and stopped only 39 days later on January 17, 2013 due to the suspension of the operating license by the Belgian Railway Inspection Agency due to safety and structural problems with the construction and maintainance of V250. All trainsets have been removed from service and sent back to AnsaldoBreda in Italy and will not be run in The Netherlands or Belgium anymore.
Is it just me or does the person who wrote this article seem a little fanny flustered?
>>864095
Can't defend them, fugly trains.
![WIENER-LINIEN-BOMBARDIER-ERHLT-AUFTRAG-FR-NEUE-BIM-GENERATION_1417457243105205[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/woj5XuJ.jpg "WIENER-LINIEN-BOMBARDIER-ERHLT-AUFTRAG-FR-NEUE-BIM-GENERATION_1417457243105205[1].jpg")
those uglies will be running in our city.
>>865004
Should have bought avenio masterrace instead
>>866371
well, i dont like the upgoing front also with the avenio it will be the better one.
>>851155
>Škoda
>soviet
pick one
What do you make of the trams in my city /n/?
Fyi the green ones on the left have all been replaced by the yellow ones on the right
>>866689
What's with them already being retired? 22 years is still young for rail vehicles and they had no issues with not being accessible.
AnsaldoBreda being AnsaldoBreda again?
>>867264
Trams are similar to buses, which are replaced in most countries every decade or so. 22 years old is quite a bit for a tram.
>>858477
You are right in not trusting them. I'm a diesel mechanic, I work on a lot of Chinese busses at work. They are fucking terrible. If the Chinese think they can get away with cutting a corner to make something cheaper they absolutely will. Shit like the idler bearings for the belts on the engine having no grease in them. They lasted about 2 months before all the idlers seized and fucked the belts. Or wheel nuts not torqued up when they left the factory. I picked one up from the dealer and the back wheels fell off and fucked the rims and all the studs.
>>867422
>trams are similar to buses
watch out we've got an expert over here
buses are old when they are 10 and after 20 years they are real wrecks
trams are old after 20-30 years and if you repairt them they can run, who knows, even up to 80.
In Milan there are trams from 1920's still in regular operation.
In Switzerland are common trams from 1960's
Where I come from, the majority of the fleet is 1970-1980.
>>867461
Finland? Gotta spread the AIDS.
Yea, the main fleet consists of 40 NrI and 42 NrII vehicles, nearly identical in construction. Built between 1973–1975 and 1983–1987.
NrII's have all been overhauled recently and low floor middle section was added, also 8 youngest NrI's got the same treatment, all got new designation of MLNRV. The whole MLNRV fleed is expected to serve at least 15 years still, which would make them all about 50 year old at retirement.
NrI fleet currently serves only at rush hours. It should be phased out when the new Artic tram (domestic production!) will replace them. Artic has designed lifespan of 40 years, with the usual midlife overhaul I suppose. They were a bit more expesive compared to the cheapest offer, but chosen for their lowest calculated overall lifetime cost. (And of course, good brothers will help their fellow coutrymen, but hey - everyone else is doing the same, so...)
Test runs with the first two prototype cars have been quite promising, no leaks at the national foamer forums or irc that would challenge that.
The same cannot be said about the fleet of early 2000s Variobahn; they maybe discarded at the age of less than 20, meaning more time for good NrI...
In this long winded reply I'm trying to say that it depends. Some vehicles haev publicly stated design life of ass little as 25 years, but there are still plenty of manufacturers, models and obviously also buyers still going strong with "at least 40 years". Most everything in Artic has been dessengned with easy replacement and replacement part manufacturing in mind.
Also, that there are not public info about problems with Mancherster, eont mean there werent any. Could be all the cars have some dormant structural fault that is about to start affecting their safe. Wont be unheard of, though more common with the first generation low floor designs. Any problems will be expensive, because it apparently is an one-off design.
Their current fleet is nearly 100, so...
>>867461
Yeah but these are 1990s pieces of shit.
>>849122
top this
>>869190
It's like you want to be outriced
>>869194
Alright I fold.
>>849122
Wright have managed to create another spasticated monstrosity.
This abomination.
>>870361
Cab interior.
>>866689
The Yellow ones look prettier, but the white and Turquoise ones had their charm. Why they had to be replaced I dunno :(
>>870361
>>870362
>>863099
Good God, looks like someone sat down to design a new bus and never stopped. And besides, most Optares have nasty-looking curves anyway.
>>870361
we have a winner. jesus fuck that's ugly
>>867598
That looks like Boston's green line tram.
>>870458
dafuq happened here?
>>851099
Wait, wasn't this thing in Blade Runner as a taxicab or something?
>>872431
It's the livery. I recall that actually used to be the Brill factory livery, we got it from a series of Brill trams delivered in the 1920s, before the cars were all green I think.
>>853239
Huh, an article on the APT-E. Nice.
>>858442
>alstom
Pretty sure those are Talgos m8.
>>864085
At least one of your Breda lemons didn't end up in the middle of Libya.
>>872857
I think you mean Total Recall.
>>851099
Reminds me of this piece of shit for some reason.
>>853928
>Gonna buy apartment in Fruängen
Feels good man
>>873222
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.
>>873276
>>873222
Here's a better pic.
Notice that the "low floor" part is in the back. And the unit can hold, like, 5 people.
It also, vibrates like a fucking spastic, stinks and is a generally retarded design. How is such a thing in use is beyond me.
Class 278 'D-Train'
Coming to Northern England soon.
>>872481
GE
>>874730
If it isn't for the engine and various things underneath, it'd look like a flatcar with the passenger car body slapped on it
>>876289
That's pretty much what it is. The floor used to be made out of asbestos sheets until they removed them. Underground drivers say they were built very poorly.
>>856888
Stainless bro.
>>873279
>>873279
That is a travesty.
Fuck you guys.
Many of these modern designs are good in the sense they're eye catching and utilize bright, happy colors that can make the typical boring commute a stimulating sight show.
stop being such creativity-suppressing. depressing assholes.
>>876500
I don´t have a problem with the colours, I have a problem with the ridiculously hideous designs and that you basically can smell the cheap plastic when you look at the pictures.
>>876500
No, fuck you and your terrible sense of design. People with retarded views such as yours are why we have these ugly, garish and childish monstrosities on our landscape.
This livery is so ugly. Seriously, Estonia?
This instead of the flag colurs of the old fleet?
>>877307
Safety. Very visible for people with poor eyesight or in low light conditions.
>>877307
Looks like a service/work vehicle.
>>877307
I kinda like it. It's going to look terrible when dirt and grime starts sticking to the white part.
>The Art of Transportation
>>853921
This is a very similar body we get in NZ, also built by designline, which shows what it would have looked like without the terrible front bumper. This is on a euro3 MAN A80 12.223 chassis (12000kg gvm and 223hp is what the numbers mean btw) the one pictured is drum brake equipped, they are more common with disc brakes. Also most of these vehicles in NZ have just been refitted and repowered using the 280hp euro 5 version of the same DO-836 6 cylinder engine.
>>877307
>>877307
>>877307
>>877834
Looks like it's missing a bumper.
>>851869
People in my hometown are in an uproar because they're going to start putting more passenger trains through our railways.
They're angry because it's a coastal town and all of the rich weekend-warriors would maybe sometimes have to wait on a train before they could get their boats out and dick around in the ocean.
It kinda pisses me off just thinking about it.
Has this been posted yet?
>>878173
>living in the north bay
how's life in petaluma
>>878367
But, but, I love the ALX400 styling
>>873071
>Talgo
Staple food of Polish rails, over 1400 units built between 1962 and 1994...
>>880037
But what replaces it, even if technically and commercially succesfull, can look even worse.
>>880038
Too far the other way...
And the winner is...
... LEW EL2 !
Narrow gauge relative, EL3
>>880977
Yes I know. Still fugly, aren't they.
>>880971
this one is actually pretty amazing, too bad they didn't made into regular production
nowadays, 25 years later, is such a concept of 100% low floor not-bendy tram ressurected in Czechia and Russia, but with much shittier design
>>880980
you know, design is like the very last thing when it comes to mining locos
And finally, even industrial locos musn't look SO bad.
Even i PRC.
>>880981
>100% low floor not-bendy tram
Wow, you guys surely have a huge loading gauge in the Eastern block?
Were these things supposed to pull trailers or operate as twin/triplet units like the old tatras did? With or without a ticket collector lady?
>>881072
>were
it's a new thing, no need to use past tense
>With or without a ticket collector lady?
without obviously, ticket ladies are a thing only in ex-USSR
>you guys surely have a huge loading gauge in the Eastern block
there are systems with more customers and with less customers, Germans could be experts on this topic. PCC-like short single cars are also still common in Belgium for example. Anyway, the thing is, that here in central / eastern Europe, the city authorities are sometimes too poor (or too backwards) to afford larger longer bendy cars where it is needed. I want to say, that such new short PCC like cars are now in western countries not wanted, because the city rather buys longer tram even when the capacity is not really necesary sometimes. Great example of such thinking could be Gmunden in Austria.
>>881139
Just saying, that car looked huge, which would need quote space to turn due overhanging. Maybe it's perspective.
In much of Western Europe the tramways were intially built to specification of 2.5 metres between tracks, whic would not allow cars much bigger than 12 meters long (with about 8 meter axle distance) and 2 wide.
I can only thing of Basel as an example where this is still the case, though they have widened the distance at curves, so they have 2.2 meter wide cars now on those lines. And then of course, there are "museum lines" like Lisbon but that doesn't count.
![6086044-_Perugia[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Qosf7BL.jpg "6086044-_Perugia[1].jpg")
>slow
>expensive
>ugly
>the whole rail system is poorly planned
>>881142
oh right, i thought you were ironically talking about capacity
it's 2.48 m wide
>>878367
How can you dislike the ALX400? Nothing better than the sight of a warm ALX400 approaching on a cold winter evening.
>>881147
That's weird. Looks like it could go around a large corporate estate, not a town.
>>881139
>the city rather buys longer tram even when the capacity is not really necesary sometimes
If the demand can be met with single PCC- or T4-like, you might as well run busses tbh.
>>857386
looks like a flat nosed dog with flappy ears
>>873279
>Mercedes
that explains a lot
>>879241
this looks like they got a duck outfit on a siemens EuroSprinter
>>850822
>That narrow platform
>>881219
Why did they build the platforms like that on such a new system? On London Underground they have converted most 2 way platforms for safety.
Pic of Angel LU station converted to Northbound operation only.
>>881235
The Glasgow system is by no means 'new'.
>>881237
Ah 1896. Makes sense then. I got confused with the Tyne and Wear Metro.
>>850822
>4ft track gauge
>Literally nothing else in the world uses 4ft gauge
It's retarded.
>>881295
Who would pay for re boring the tiny tunnels though?
>>881295
Unless major expansion plans are drawn up there would be no reason to rebore the whole system to fit bigger gauges.
>>881295
They have 11 feet tunnel too. How retarded is that? Like I said to some other poster, how the cars could be changed in any significant ways with such a tight engineering specifications; different headlamps perhaps?
It's fascinating, the system was originally cable-hauled, but was hastily converted to electricity as late as 30s. Many totally legal videos in youtube about it.
They even retained the original crane that was used to lift cars off the tunnel, there were no switches in the system. Also the system was four rails, one for carriage lighting at 250V (original from the cable-era) and another for power, 600V.
When the system shut down at 1978 for complete overhaul, it had ran 80 years with minimal maintenance. Everthing: tracks, tunnels, stations carriages (the original cable cars were converted to electricity) and much of the electric infrastructure was completely worn out. Now its very nice, pity that such a tiny trains wont justify any extensions to it.
>>881194
If you already have the rails, there's no use switching to buses.
At worst, you're looking at removing catenary once it expires and equipping the trams with diesel generators.
>>881735
It's not like the whole catenary would just fail like that, the rails and the catenary need regular maintenance.
>>881735
because equpping all trams with diesel engines is so much cheaper than new catenary
>/n/tard logic
![$_57[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/eIPp4t4.jpg "$_57[1].jpg")
>>881743
This tbh. Once a system is in place it's far cheaper to just keep maintaining it than scrapping it entirely and converting everything to a new system.
Milwaukee Road actually LOST money when it de-electrified and went full diesel.
>>881745
How you want to account it. I understand the electrical infrastructure had significant "maintenance debt", that it would have needed a complete overhaul in near future if electric traffic would have continued. Also their rollingstock was getting old.
>>881735
>>881738
Meaning tram lines don't have a single expiration date when everything just atomizes. Scheduled maintanence takes place constantly around the network. After 100+ years of service things have little relation to dates things were built. It's not like "line so and so was built at 1901 and track replaced every 40 years in one go, so the next maintenance will be in 2021", instead serctions at the burbs may be about that age or older and in the city center some high use intersections may wear down in less than a decade and switch noses and tight curves have material edded to them by welding semi-annually (much to the joy of the motorists).
If scheduled maintenance is omitted, breakages get more common and maintenance costs grow (because it needs to be done by "quick response team") and at the same time revenue is lost.
>>882040
>How you want to account it. I understand the electrical infrastructure had significant "maintenance debt", that it would have needed a complete overhaul in near future if electric traffic would have continued. Also their rollingstock was getting old.
He'll probably with that myth that GE offered MILWR to rebuild their electrical infrastructure for free.
But yeah, you're right, the equipment had reached the end of its useful life.
>If scheduled maintenance is omitted, breakages get more common and maintenance costs grow (because it needs to be done by "quick response team") and at the same time revenue is lost.
That's probably one of the main reasons many networks disappeared. After a decade of deferred maintenance and a war time boom in ridership most network were completely worn out.
>>882220
Overhead wires need very little maintenance. In the UK some dates from the 1920s.
>>882220
It's not a myth when we have the documents that prove it.
>>881147
That's pretty awful.
>>882220
lel there catenary on the NEC well almost a century old.
>>881235
>Angel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXTpngoTS-o
>>880037
I like it tbh. Reminds me of the metro
>>884610
Yeah and that's why states are spending millions rebuilding the antiquated PRR wiring.
>>851194
>future
>>884740
Yeah that's how I know the platforms were converted. I like the part when he talks about the new station then says "yeah they won't have turds like us working in the new station".
>>853807
They're not awful, just bland. Moor Street station makes up for them though
>>855616
got on one of those skips in Cumbria over summer and they're fucking terrifying.
>>849122
The class 458.
>>854193
Not only that, but also the EU laws liberalizing the market for public transportation (private companies must have the chance to bid for the service of any line) and therefore making lots of DB rolling stock workless since DB is losing a lot of biddings to new private companies.
Best examples for Germany(all of them are DMUs): class 628.4 (build 1992-1996), 611, 612, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644 (all built 1999ff.) just to name a few. While the 628.4 are already a bit older, but still very usable and efficient in terms of maintenance and costs ( lots of them already retired, but luckily not scrapped yet), the other examples are from partly (612, 640, 641, 643) up to almost completely (644) workless, because the final bidding was either won by another company or the new "traffic contract" given out by the local state say, that new rolling stock must be bought for the local operation (reasons do vary though).
There are several places (mostly huge abandoned freight yards) in Germany, where the DB is collecting rolling stock just because they have no idea where else to put them in service again.
Just to give you an idea what is happening here.
>>858440
My jimmies were rustled, when I learned that Manila's Metro is using modified high floor Tatra trams, which where used literally everywhere in the Eastern bloc. From Berlin to Pyongjang (or Manila). Literally EVERYWHERE.
![den-haag-tram[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/S5YpLa9.jpg "den-haag-tram[1].jpg")
Trams in the hague
>>887806
>all of them are DMUs
Many of them also lost their purpose after their lines were electrified.
>>887806
Man DB is getting fucked. The worst part is that they plan to start buying Chinese rolling stock within the next five years.
I can't wait to hear about the Siemens/Alstom patent suits whenever they go ahead with that policy.
>>888439
> The worst part is that they plan to start buying Chinese rolling stock within the next five years.
This will end by 100% in another disaster. DB has an up to date contract with Alstom, Bombardier and CAF for a few hundred EMUs (no CAF material ordered though). They also "threatened" the germany experienced rolling stock producers (which mostly constists of Siemens, Alstom, Bombardier and Stadler) to give orders to Hitachi (also no material ordered).
The first two newbies in the big german business are Skoda (new push-pull train sets for high speed commuter trains Munich - Nuremberg) and lots of new "LINK" DMUs produced by the Polish company "PESA.
The latter one is already a big flop since they don't know shit how to get the operation concession. Production mistakes and wrong data regarding weight, emission and fuel aren't making it better either.
Since they know, that their ordered LINKs won't get the concession anytime soon, they came back to Alstom and ordered new Coradia LINTs.
You don't need any comedy entertainment once you get to learn what a giant pile of shit is produced here by EU and the railway companies.
>>888455
>You don't need any comedy entertainment once you get to learn what a giant pile of shit is produced here by EU and the railway companies.
[obligatory "at least it's not a Breda" joke]
>>888504
Still better than this one, but all Flexitys are ugly.
AVE Class 102 anyone?
They just phased these Gold Coast buses out and they now have the green translink colour, but still a few are in use (Australia )
>>889598
That is going round too fast
>>888580
and we get them now in Vienna
>>887854
Not that bad tbh, if you like commie styling.
