Trains

[handyandy1100]

What about ships?
View attachment 114011

Most only seem to streamlined below the waterline where it can't be seen.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Phil Fink]

I believe that technically ships cannot be streamlined due to the density of water and gravity of Earth.

 

[Duchess]

Maybe not ships which are utilitarian and displacement hulls that receive little to no benefit from aerodynamic improvements (even if aerodynamics in this case is primarily a stylized aesthetic rather than necessarily offering actual gains in efficiency) so much as pleasure boats. Although they technically predate Streamline as a design movement, I would say that post-WW1 wood speedboats—Baby Bootlegger would be a great example with its round sheer and simple form—qualify as streamlined.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

One would think that with the higher density of water, streamlining would be more important. Hydrodynamics.
And also, this!

 

[sandman]

To many U boats out there to play with ships .
But I have had a lot of bikes that felt like tanks ?

 

[handyandy1100]

Yes, boats and even ships can be aerodynamic and streamlined top side, but I thought this discussion was more about art-deco styling. Modern cars are more aerodynamic, but none are art-deco.
As for nautical art-deco, you probably want to look at pre WWII motor boats as previously suggested.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[handyandy1100]

Puget Sound ferry from the late 1930's

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[handyandy1100]

But back to trains...
The M10000, an early diesel streamliner...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Duchess]

I cut this way down as I can go on forever about this stuff, especially where I'm building a streamlined power boat, but streamlining is about aerodynamic styling over actual efficiency (what looks aerodynamic is often not at all and vice versa), but boats rely on hydrodynamics below the waterline and that's designed for function, not style. Baby Bootlegger is a gorgeous, but primitive planing hull. Even so, if you look at the design of the hull below the waterline, you'll see the planing hull form doesn't match the displacement hull style of the topsides (it would be really slow and I would think might have stability issues if it did). I'm not an expert on this, I just know enough to know to buy the plans that matched my goals and chosen size of my hull (below the waterline) from a naval architect.

That ferry is awesome! I wish the MV and Nantucket (slow) ferries looked so cool.

 

[Grant]

 

[sdframe]

Oh, those automobiles!

 

[handyandy1100]

Oh, those automobiles!
View attachment 114033 View attachment 114034 View attachment 114035

Cords are awesome.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[MattiThundrrr]

The coffin nose was so unique!

 

[MattiThundrrr]

@Duchess I think Webster's and I are going to have to disagree with you on the definition of streamlining

Definition of streamline

1: the path of a particle in a fluid relative to a solid body past which the fluid is moving in smooth flow without turbulence
2a: a contour designed to minimize resistance to motion through a fluid (such as air)
b: a smooth or flowing line designed as if for decreasing air resistance

 

[Duchess]

@Duchess I think Webster's and I are going to have to disagree with you on the definition of streamlining

Definition of streamline

1: the path of a particle in a fluid relative to a solid body past which the fluid is moving in smooth flow without turbulence
2a: a contour designed to minimize resistance to motion through a fluid (such as air)
b: a smooth or flowing line designed as if for decreasing air resistance

This conversation is about Streamlining as a design movement sometimes known as Streamline Moderne, which was a development of Art Deco and is sometimes just considered Art Deco and not broken out. It has little to do with streamlining in regards to actual aerodynamic improvements. Even appliances were "streamlined" and they don't need to move except when they're close at hand during instances of sudden home invasion. Early streamlining might have had the intent of aerodynamic improvement in terms of transportation design, but most any gains were largely down to the designs they replaced being so terrible for drag. Aircraft and air racing was big and designers wanted to take that excitement and apply it to other forms of transportation as a way to sell their products. It wasn't for another few decades that actual aerodynamics outside of aircraft was lifted out of the designer's eye for what looked right to an actual science. As it so happens, what looks low drag is often at adds with what actually is low drag. Even then, it was mainly of concern to racers (later balanced against the drag induced by aerodynamic devices employed to reduce lift) and the great majority of road cars wouldn't be too concerned with it until the gas crises and emissions standards drove the designers to try to get a vehicle farther on less fuel and not lose as much top speed in spite of the loss of engine power due to emissions equipment.

With a quick search, I didn't see comparisons of cda, which is more meaningful than just coefficient of drag alone, but a Lamborghini Countach has a cd in the low .4s (and if that figure doesn't include the wing, it would be even worse when so equipped) and a Jaguar E-Type somewhere in the mid .4s. A Toyota Sienna is about .31 and the Mercedes Benz Bionic which looks like the boxfish that inspired it had an amazing cd of .19. Now, Streamline as a design movement was gone well before the E-Type, but I wouldn't think it a stretch to say that the Lamborghini and Jags were designed in a similar fashion of stylized aerodynamics over function so as to be spiritual successors to Streamline Moderne (the latter car was an evolution of the D-Type racer, which was styled by eye to be aerodynamic . . . it was about .49 and even I'm a little surprised to see that it was apparently worse than the E-Type). The difference in values is eye vs. science. The "eye" designs look a lot better aerodynamically (and aesthetically with these examples), but they aren't—they are Streamlined not streamlined.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

I guess I wasn't clear enough in linking design styles. Big S Streamlining paused for the war, you are correct. However, it turned into small s (functional) streamlining, which led to the decadent post war find and wings. Harley Earl was hugely influenced by the WW2 planes, as you can see clearly when you compare the p38 lightning posted above, and this caddy.

Note the lack of concern for coefficient of drag, and "aero style" elements. Streamlining did not die at the end of the deco era.

 

[handyandy1100]

And back to trains... LOL

As mentioned above, non Deco Streamlined styling was alive in the '50's though hardly aerodynamic.

Here's General Motors' Aerotrain.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerotrain_(GM)

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[deorman]

The wooden speedboats brought back memories of my grandfathers vacation cabin on the Chesapeake. I imagine his boat would be worth a small fortune now.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

Wow, Aerotrain has quite the nose on it!
'40 GM Futureliner (aparently I'm a fan of Harley Earl!)

It's almost a train!

 

[handyandy1100]

Since this is Rat Rod Bikes, I figured we needed something ratty in this discussion.
This is an early '50's Hafner clockwork streamlined O gauge locomotive. I'm currently in the process of repowering it with old Marx electric running gear. Trying to decide if I will keep the original finish and patina, or fix it up "right." LOL

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk