Vote for your favorite image featuring “decrepit diesels!” The poll is open through July 23.
http://trn.trains.com/photos-videos/trackside/2017/07/vol-308-decrepit-diesels
Interesting that two submitters found the same locomotive…
And I’ve finally found an image of an IC/ICG Paducah rebuild with the “frog eyes” headlights - or the remnants thereof…
and the interveining years didn’t enhance it’s appearance one way or the other!
And that it is so far removed from being ‘decrepit’ – the paint is good, panels straight – it just has goopy white deposits on it. Much of the power I see on NS or BNSF in Memphis is technically in more-worn-down shape than this…
Pictures of those are rare? There were scads of them around on Mid-South in Shreveport in the mid-Nineties, the last place I could park and listen to the music of five idling 567s at the same time. Many, perhaps all of these had those distinctive frogeye lights. What makes pictures of them hard to find?
What a great selection of geriatric growlers. Making a decision wasn’t easy…and I think it’s safe to say that in its own way, each of them is a winner.
That brutal “improvement” shattered the glass in all lenses pointed at them?
(I worry about that when I shoot the Talgo 8 sets.)
Perhaps if they had chosen to include my photo there would have been a little more variety.
Two people shot the same locomotive. Twice (the CNW F7 and the Fort Smith GP16). What are the odds…?
I’m actually one of the few who liked those things. Railroading’s answer to the Porsche 928! (Of course those are funny-looking too – but oh brother! what a joy it is to really SEE where you are going at night!)
Aren’t there two sets of photographers who submitted the same locomotive? Joanathan Arndt and Kerry Skidmore submitted C&NW #401. Kenneth G. Williamson and Alex Mays submitted A&F #1612.
I wonder if the results would have been better if the category was “Decrepit diesels still in use”?
Surprised no one submitted this one
Second!
Well, Since the time is about to run out on this Thread (07/23?) I am going to put in a vote for my personal favorite one. Unfortunately, it was an ‘Orphan’.
The GM&O RR’s # 1900, an Ingalls Shipbuiilding 4-S, built in Pascagoula, Ms.
Photo linked here @ http://www.railpictures.net/photo/612180/#remarks
After the War (WWII) Ingalls built the 4-S @ 1650 HP (Eng: Superior Diesel-Marine type- ). It was to be a demo for Ingall’s ideas of what was needed by the railroad industry ( a whole family of power- something similar to EMD’s F-3 multi- unit engine sets?).
It did a tour around the country (C&O and Southern, were two, I remembered). Unfortunately, it was not welcomed with open arms, (in a time of EMD rising, and Baldwin,ALCO and others?). It was eventually offered to the GM&O, and sold for less than $150K. It was based out of the Shops at Jackson, Tn, and ran South, mainly into Mississipp and to Mobile,Al. I used to see it regularly, working in the small yard at Corinth,Ms. I was told that the railroad employees considered it to be a ‘Shop Pet’ at Jackson. It was said tio be a very tough engine. In fact, it was once derailed and rolled over, in the 1960’s. Repaired, it was put back into service. I think it was finally traded to EMD, and scrapped in '67(?) @ Pielet in Chicago(?).
Perhaps. But you sent multiple images, and the rules specifically state to send only one.
Actually I sent in one and my wife sent in one, although I’ll admit that she used my email account because it was up and we were too lazy to switch to her account. Our error.
S4 is an Alco. The Ingalls was a 4-S.
Even in 1966 that thing wasn’t really decrepit-looking. For GM&O diesel desuetude you wanted these:
(Adding insult to injury, just a couple of tracks over were the two Baldwin passenger units, just as clean and dapper as could be.)
Your error was not submitting a photo of CNW 401 or the PREX 1612! [(-D]
Balt - B&O 6525 would have been an excellent choice.
Mathematical irony squared? You were disqualified for submitting 2 entries. 2 entries accepted were of the same locomotive by different photographers. That happened twice.
I wonder if it’s possible to just send back a reply to someone who submitted 2? How ‘bout “Hey pal- we see you submitted 2 photos. [sigh] How’s about you re-read the rules, pick up the pace and resubmit ONE photo. Thank you and have a nice day.[:)]” (Or something like that [:-^] )
( [:o)] )
Regardless of the submitter, I would have expected the screener to only permit one version of a submitted engine. [}:)]