Ugly Pacifics

[Flintlock76]

pennytrains

The only "ugly" steam locomotive is a neglected steam locomotive.  Like this one: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/81768549454725195/

Of course, we know her future is much brighter now!

 

Oh, that's not really ugly, just abandoned, neglected and unloved.  

[Flintlock76]

Overmod

They had some scary looking 2-8-8-2s, too,

Yes, they were homely all right, but they were used for hump work in Potomac Yard and not for view by the general public on the mainline.  

[Overmod]

Flintlock76

... the Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac had some ugly Pacifics.

They had some scary looking 2-8-8-2s, too, and I suspect for the same reason: C&O.

Few other railroads have the chutzpah to put nickel cylinder-head covers on an engine with flying pumps and an Elesco closed feedwater heater.

[pennytrains]

The only "ugly" steam locomotive is a neglected steam locomotive.  Like this one: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/81768549454725195/

Of course, we know her future is much brighter now!

[Flintlock76]

I'm almost ashamed to say this about a former first-class outfit, but the Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac had some ugly Pacifics.  They might have looked a lot better without the air pumps plastered all over the front of the smokebox.  Scary-lookin'!

Definately NOT in the same league as the Generals, Governors, and Statesmen 4-8-4s!

[Backshop]

Rather than start a new thread, I think the PRR K4 is ugly.  Yet, the PRR is my favorite railroad.  In fact, I think most of their power is ugly. I don't like Belpaire fireboxes. My favorite era (which I missed) was late steam/first generation diesel.  I like the PRR because of how heavy duty it was and its diversity of both power and geography.  Go figure...

[BigJim]

I have gotten to the age where I try to refrain from polls requiring superlative words. After all, as they say, opinions are like butt holes, everybody has one. So, Mr. Morgan had his opinion on appearanes. I just don't agree with it.

[Overmod]

It does have to be said that the homegrown Es were not up there in any proportional visual respect. 

Compare this to... well, almost any other Pacific with a comparably-sized tender:

http://www.columbusrailroads.com/photo-orm/set2-3-1000.jpg

The E3 was a PRR K with some dubious trim changes, but (as you note) we don't count that.  Had N&W chosen to streamstyle any of the E locomotives, it might have been as interesting as the streamlined K 4-8-2s (and whatever changes in the running gear, the locomotive operation would be flawless...)

On the other hand, the N&W Pacifics were far from the 'ugliest'.  Could DPM have been expressing a, might we say, parochial opinion?

We have had threads and threads on the subject of ugliest engines here, but to me the Pacific-category honor has to go to the NYC K6b's from Brooks.  I'm not a fan of the Selkirk Frankenstein-monster front end appearance, regardless of how helpful in servicing the arrangement was.  But the arrangement Brooks slung on those Pacifics was pretty awful, and needlessly criminal considering the 'other' engines of the same general class with normal, properly-proportioned smokebox doors and headlight arrangement.

 

[BigJim]

Classic Trains,
    I have to take exception with David P. Morgan's assessment of Pacific appearance on page 55 of Steam's Lost Empire III. To paraphrase his statement - "As for appearance (and passenger locomotives are, or should be, by definition , stylish),...the handsomest (Southern's Ps-4) and ugliest (Norfolk & Western's E) steam specimens.". Now, there were a lot of ugly Pacific type locomotives around the country, however, the N&W's Class E, E1, E2, E2a and even the Pennsyish E3 were not among the lot! Witness the many ugly 4-6-2's that you graced your article with!!!